Ukraine struck at the heart of Russia’s air power on 1 June in one of its most daring operations of the war—codenamed Operation Spiderweb. Over 100 low-cost, first-person-view (FPV) drones hit air bases in five Russian regions, damaging at least 41 military aircraft including Tu-95, Tu-22M, and A-50 strategic planes.
According to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the “brilliant” strike had been under development for 18 months. In his nightly address, he said, “It took one year, six months, and nine days from the start of planning to effective execution.”
Zelenskyy also revealed that the operation was run from an office near the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) headquarters. A Ukrainian military source described it as “extremely complex”, involving the smuggling of drones hidden inside wooden mobile houses mounted on trucks.
“Later, drones were hidden under the roofs of these houses while already placed on trucks. At the right moment, the roofs of the houses were remotely opened, and the drones flew to hit Russian bombers,” the source added.
Operation Spiderweb: Targets spanned five time zones
Russia’s Defence Ministry confirmed the strikes occurred across five regions: Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ivanovo, Ryazan, and Amur. These locations span more than 7,000 kilometres—underscoring the depth of Ukraine’s reach.
Russian social media showed video clips of drones rising from containers and men attempting to interfere with their launch. Satellite imagery later revealed severe damage to aircraft stationed at these sites. At Irkutsk’s Belaya air base, multiple Tu-22M3 bombers were seen ablaze.
Moscow’s official response downplayed the scale, labelling the attack “a terrorist act”. However, Russian military bloggers admitted the operation had seriously weakened Russia’s long-range air capabilities.
At Olenya Air Base in the Murmansk region, footage shared by Russian air defence personnel showed multiple Tu-95MS bombers ablaze. Unverified but credible reports suggest two Tu-95MS aircraft were destroyed and two others damaged, along with one An-12 Cub transport aircraft. Olenya, on the Kola Peninsula, is home to the 40th Composite Aviation Regiment, which operates Tu-22M3 bombers.
Another strike at Belaya Air Base near Irkutsk may have been even more damaging. Satellite images analysed by defence observers indicate that at least three Tu-95MS bombers were destroyed, with another possibly damaged, and as many as four Tu-22M3s eliminated.
Additional attacks were reported at Dyagilevo and Ivanovo air bases. Dyagilevo, in Ryazan, is a known training centre for Russia’s Long-Range Aviation fleet. Ivanovo, located northeast of Moscow, hosts Russia’s A-50 airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, though most are currently forward deployed. The A-50s play a critical role in Russia’s air defence network.
Moscow confirmed attacks in the Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ryazan, Ivanovo, and Amur regions. The Ministry of Defence admitted that “several” aircraft were set ablaze in Murmansk and Irkutsk, effectively confirming that Olenya and Belaya were hit.
A separate incident in the Amur region, near Ukrainka Air Base, may have involved a truck filled with drones. Videos from the scene show the vehicle burning before reaching its intended target.
Drones vs F-35 jets: An inflection point in modern warfare
The most striking aspect of Operation Spiderweb lies in its cost-efficiency. While each F-35 fighter jet costs upwards of $80 million, Ukraine reportedly used drones worth as little as $500 to disable aircraft collectively valued at over $7 billion.
This, according to defence analysts, reflects a broader shift in warfare—where tactical innovation can now outweigh brute force and expensive platforms.
Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX and former adviser to Donald Trump on federal spending, criticised continued reliance on manned fighter jets. In a pointed post, Musk wrote, “Manned fighter jets are obsolete in the age of drones anyway. Will just get pilots killed.”
Musk’s remarks came shortly before Trump proposed selling F-35s to India—an offer that New Delhi has not yet accepted. Instead, the Indian government has focused on expanding its domestic drone capabilities.
Drones are changing the battlefield faster than strategy can keep up
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been used in war since the early 20th century. But Ukraine has scaled up their use to an unprecedented degree. Nearly every Ukrainian brigade now has a drone unit, using small UAVs for both reconnaissance and direct attacks.
Earlier this year, Ukraine aimed to manufacture one million FPV drones. By October, Zelenskyy claimed the nation could produce up to 4 million annually.
These drones, flown manually by operators, have proven capable of tracking and striking moving targets with high accuracy. Though their payloads are limited compared to traditional artillery, their precision and accessibility make them a key tool in Ukraine’s arsenal.
And unlike jets that require air superiority, refuelling tankers, or satellite support, these drones can be launched from the back of a truck.
Russia’s layered air defences proved inadequate
Despite its vast geography and heavily fortified bases, Russia was unable to stop the drone offensive. The slow-flying, low-altitude drones reportedly evaded radar by launching from inside Russia—essentially bypassing perimeter detection systems.
The strike exposed vulnerabilities at airfields like Engels, Belaya, and Olenya—once thought to be secure. These bases lacked proper counter-drone defences, especially systems to detect low-tech, loitering munitions launched from ground level.
Pro-Kremlin bloggers, usually quick to defend Russian forces, acknowledged the attack’s effectiveness. Some even questioned why key aircraft had not been moved, despite the high alert following Russia’s own massive drone barrage against Ukraine on 31 May.
According to Ukrainian military estimates, the attacks destroyed around 40 aircraft, causing damage worth approximately $7 billion. That figure is difficult to confirm due to the unknown extent of damage and the age of the aircraft, many of which are no longer in production.
A war of drones, not jets
While drones were once viewed as a supplementary technology, Ukraine has turned them into frontline assets. Countries like China, Türkiye, and Israel dominate the drone export market. Yet Ukraine has demonstrated that domestic production, tactical creativity, and minimal resources can produce strategic outcomes.
In India, similar trends are visible. During May’s Operation Sindoor, India deployed homegrown kamikaze drones like SkyStriker and Nagastra-1. Developed by Bengaluru-based Alpha Design Technologies in partnership with Israel’s Elbit Systems, SkyStriker drones were used for precision strikes. Surveillance was carried out using Hawk drones from Zuppa Geo Navigation Technologies.
As Ulrike Franke of the European Council on Foreign Relations put it, mass production and affordability can compensate for the lack of high-end features—if employed cleverly.
Heavy bomber losses and strategic risk
The bombers targeted in these strikes—particularly the Tu-95MS and Tu-22M3—form the backbone of Russia’s strategic airstrike capability. Most were built during the Cold War, and Russia lacks the industrial capacity to replace them at pace.
The Tu-95MS, or Bear-H, is a four-engine turboprop bomber designed in the 1950s and updated through the 1980s to carry cruise missiles. Russia entered the war with fewer than 50 Tu-95MS bombers. If reports of five confirmed losses are accurate, it would mark a 10% reduction in the fleet—a major operational hit.
The Tu-22M3, known as the Backfire, is a swing-wing bomber capable of delivering free-fall bombs and long-range missiles. While more numerous, its upgrade programme has been slow. Russia began the war with around 60 Tu-22M3s, but has suffered further attrition since 2022.
There is no confirmation yet that any Tu-160 Blackjacks—the most modern and valuable Russian bombers—were destroyed. But even limited losses across all three strategic bomber types would stretch Russia’s capacity to sustain long-range strikes.
The Tu-160, Russia’s most advanced bomber, is being slowly supplemented by new-build Tu-160Ms. Each of these is valued at over $270 million, though Russian expert Piotr Butowski believes the cost is likely “underestimated,” and said, “in the current circumstances, I would add another 50 percent.”
The Tu-160M, he added, “is the only aircraft that is currently in production, so its price can be estimated.” By contrast, estimating the cost of the Tu-95MS is difficult: “How to estimate the price of the Tu-95MS, which has not been produced for 30-plus years and has no replacement? Its value to the Russian air force is greater than money.”
While Russia has plans to build up to 50 new Tu-160Ms, only a few prototypes have been completed, and none are in frontline service. Even if construction ramps up, these bombers cannot be produced quickly.
Nuclear proximity raises global concerns
One final element of Operation Spiderweb has heightened international attention: the drones struck strategic bombers capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
Though no nuclear command facilities or warheads were targeted, the attack on platforms like the Tu-95 sent an unmissable message. For Russia, these bombers are a core element of its nuclear deterrence doctrine.
The drone attacks appear to have dealt a rare, large-scale blow to the most flexible leg of Russia’s nuclear triad. The long-range bombers are not just used to launch cruise missiles into Ukraine, but are part of Moscow’s strategic nuclear deterrent, regularly patrolling regions as distant as the Arctic, Europe, and even the Pacific.
Sunday’s attacks may not yet provoke a strategic escalation, but they mark a serious dent in Russia’s deterrence credibility. Moscow has repeatedly stated that strikes on strategic military assets could cross a “red line.” Yet, similar attacks have taken place over the past two years, albeit none on this scale.
If even a fraction of the reported damage proves accurate, Ukraine’s latest drone operation could reshape the long-term trajectory of Russia’s air war—simply because these ageing aircraft cannot be replaced.
Even without an escalation, the implications are serious. If such assets can be hit by cheap drones, it raises fresh questions about deterrence credibility and strategic stability.
(with inputs from NYT, agencies)
According to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the “brilliant” strike had been under development for 18 months. In his nightly address, he said, “It took one year, six months, and nine days from the start of planning to effective execution.”
Zelenskyy also revealed that the operation was run from an office near the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) headquarters. A Ukrainian military source described it as “extremely complex”, involving the smuggling of drones hidden inside wooden mobile houses mounted on trucks.
“Later, drones were hidden under the roofs of these houses while already placed on trucks. At the right moment, the roofs of the houses were remotely opened, and the drones flew to hit Russian bombers,” the source added.
Operation Spiderweb: Targets spanned five time zones
Russia’s Defence Ministry confirmed the strikes occurred across five regions: Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ivanovo, Ryazan, and Amur. These locations span more than 7,000 kilometres—underscoring the depth of Ukraine’s reach.
Russian social media showed video clips of drones rising from containers and men attempting to interfere with their launch. Satellite imagery later revealed severe damage to aircraft stationed at these sites. At Irkutsk’s Belaya air base, multiple Tu-22M3 bombers were seen ablaze.
Moscow’s official response downplayed the scale, labelling the attack “a terrorist act”. However, Russian military bloggers admitted the operation had seriously weakened Russia’s long-range air capabilities.
At Olenya Air Base in the Murmansk region, footage shared by Russian air defence personnel showed multiple Tu-95MS bombers ablaze. Unverified but credible reports suggest two Tu-95MS aircraft were destroyed and two others damaged, along with one An-12 Cub transport aircraft. Olenya, on the Kola Peninsula, is home to the 40th Composite Aviation Regiment, which operates Tu-22M3 bombers.
Another strike at Belaya Air Base near Irkutsk may have been even more damaging. Satellite images analysed by defence observers indicate that at least three Tu-95MS bombers were destroyed, with another possibly damaged, and as many as four Tu-22M3s eliminated.
Additional attacks were reported at Dyagilevo and Ivanovo air bases. Dyagilevo, in Ryazan, is a known training centre for Russia’s Long-Range Aviation fleet. Ivanovo, located northeast of Moscow, hosts Russia’s A-50 airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, though most are currently forward deployed. The A-50s play a critical role in Russia’s air defence network.
Moscow confirmed attacks in the Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ryazan, Ivanovo, and Amur regions. The Ministry of Defence admitted that “several” aircraft were set ablaze in Murmansk and Irkutsk, effectively confirming that Olenya and Belaya were hit.
A separate incident in the Amur region, near Ukrainka Air Base, may have involved a truck filled with drones. Videos from the scene show the vehicle burning before reaching its intended target.
Drones vs F-35 jets: An inflection point in modern warfare
The most striking aspect of Operation Spiderweb lies in its cost-efficiency. While each F-35 fighter jet costs upwards of $80 million, Ukraine reportedly used drones worth as little as $500 to disable aircraft collectively valued at over $7 billion.
This, according to defence analysts, reflects a broader shift in warfare—where tactical innovation can now outweigh brute force and expensive platforms.
Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX and former adviser to Donald Trump on federal spending, criticised continued reliance on manned fighter jets. In a pointed post, Musk wrote, “Manned fighter jets are obsolete in the age of drones anyway. Will just get pilots killed.”
Musk’s remarks came shortly before Trump proposed selling F-35s to India—an offer that New Delhi has not yet accepted. Instead, the Indian government has focused on expanding its domestic drone capabilities.
Drones are changing the battlefield faster than strategy can keep up
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been used in war since the early 20th century. But Ukraine has scaled up their use to an unprecedented degree. Nearly every Ukrainian brigade now has a drone unit, using small UAVs for both reconnaissance and direct attacks.
Earlier this year, Ukraine aimed to manufacture one million FPV drones. By October, Zelenskyy claimed the nation could produce up to 4 million annually.
These drones, flown manually by operators, have proven capable of tracking and striking moving targets with high accuracy. Though their payloads are limited compared to traditional artillery, their precision and accessibility make them a key tool in Ukraine’s arsenal.
And unlike jets that require air superiority, refuelling tankers, or satellite support, these drones can be launched from the back of a truck.
Russia’s layered air defences proved inadequate
Despite its vast geography and heavily fortified bases, Russia was unable to stop the drone offensive. The slow-flying, low-altitude drones reportedly evaded radar by launching from inside Russia—essentially bypassing perimeter detection systems.
The strike exposed vulnerabilities at airfields like Engels, Belaya, and Olenya—once thought to be secure. These bases lacked proper counter-drone defences, especially systems to detect low-tech, loitering munitions launched from ground level.
Pro-Kremlin bloggers, usually quick to defend Russian forces, acknowledged the attack’s effectiveness. Some even questioned why key aircraft had not been moved, despite the high alert following Russia’s own massive drone barrage against Ukraine on 31 May.
According to Ukrainian military estimates, the attacks destroyed around 40 aircraft, causing damage worth approximately $7 billion. That figure is difficult to confirm due to the unknown extent of damage and the age of the aircraft, many of which are no longer in production.
A war of drones, not jets
While drones were once viewed as a supplementary technology, Ukraine has turned them into frontline assets. Countries like China, Türkiye, and Israel dominate the drone export market. Yet Ukraine has demonstrated that domestic production, tactical creativity, and minimal resources can produce strategic outcomes.
In India, similar trends are visible. During May’s Operation Sindoor, India deployed homegrown kamikaze drones like SkyStriker and Nagastra-1. Developed by Bengaluru-based Alpha Design Technologies in partnership with Israel’s Elbit Systems, SkyStriker drones were used for precision strikes. Surveillance was carried out using Hawk drones from Zuppa Geo Navigation Technologies.
As Ulrike Franke of the European Council on Foreign Relations put it, mass production and affordability can compensate for the lack of high-end features—if employed cleverly.
Heavy bomber losses and strategic risk
The bombers targeted in these strikes—particularly the Tu-95MS and Tu-22M3—form the backbone of Russia’s strategic airstrike capability. Most were built during the Cold War, and Russia lacks the industrial capacity to replace them at pace.
The Tu-95MS, or Bear-H, is a four-engine turboprop bomber designed in the 1950s and updated through the 1980s to carry cruise missiles. Russia entered the war with fewer than 50 Tu-95MS bombers. If reports of five confirmed losses are accurate, it would mark a 10% reduction in the fleet—a major operational hit.
The Tu-22M3, known as the Backfire, is a swing-wing bomber capable of delivering free-fall bombs and long-range missiles. While more numerous, its upgrade programme has been slow. Russia began the war with around 60 Tu-22M3s, but has suffered further attrition since 2022.
There is no confirmation yet that any Tu-160 Blackjacks—the most modern and valuable Russian bombers—were destroyed. But even limited losses across all three strategic bomber types would stretch Russia’s capacity to sustain long-range strikes.
The Tu-160, Russia’s most advanced bomber, is being slowly supplemented by new-build Tu-160Ms. Each of these is valued at over $270 million, though Russian expert Piotr Butowski believes the cost is likely “underestimated,” and said, “in the current circumstances, I would add another 50 percent.”
The Tu-160M, he added, “is the only aircraft that is currently in production, so its price can be estimated.” By contrast, estimating the cost of the Tu-95MS is difficult: “How to estimate the price of the Tu-95MS, which has not been produced for 30-plus years and has no replacement? Its value to the Russian air force is greater than money.”
While Russia has plans to build up to 50 new Tu-160Ms, only a few prototypes have been completed, and none are in frontline service. Even if construction ramps up, these bombers cannot be produced quickly.
Nuclear proximity raises global concerns
One final element of Operation Spiderweb has heightened international attention: the drones struck strategic bombers capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
Though no nuclear command facilities or warheads were targeted, the attack on platforms like the Tu-95 sent an unmissable message. For Russia, these bombers are a core element of its nuclear deterrence doctrine.
The drone attacks appear to have dealt a rare, large-scale blow to the most flexible leg of Russia’s nuclear triad. The long-range bombers are not just used to launch cruise missiles into Ukraine, but are part of Moscow’s strategic nuclear deterrent, regularly patrolling regions as distant as the Arctic, Europe, and even the Pacific.
Sunday’s attacks may not yet provoke a strategic escalation, but they mark a serious dent in Russia’s deterrence credibility. Moscow has repeatedly stated that strikes on strategic military assets could cross a “red line.” Yet, similar attacks have taken place over the past two years, albeit none on this scale.
If even a fraction of the reported damage proves accurate, Ukraine’s latest drone operation could reshape the long-term trajectory of Russia’s air war—simply because these ageing aircraft cannot be replaced.
Even without an escalation, the implications are serious. If such assets can be hit by cheap drones, it raises fresh questions about deterrence credibility and strategic stability.
(with inputs from NYT, agencies)
You may also like
Elon Musk turns on Donald Trump in scathing tirade against 'big beautiful bill'
Perishers - 5th June 2025
Cheapest supermarket for May 2025 named out of Tesco, Asda, Lidl and Aldi
DWP pension shake-up to give 20million Brits major boost to retirement savings
Ditch bleach to remove silicone sealant mould in 10 minutes for 1 powerful household item
