By John Q. Hosedrinker 
On the night of December 21-22, 2024, Russia launched a massive drone assault on Ukraine, deploying 103 unmanned aerial vehicles from multiple directions. Ukrainian air defenses successfully intercepted 52 drones, while 44 decoys vanished from radar. Accompanying this attack was an Iskander-M missile launch from Crimea, and resulting damage included infrastructure and property across several Ukrainian oblasts, though thankfully no casualties were reported. The attacks originated from various locations within Russia and occupied Ukrainian territories.
Read the original article here
Ukrainian air defenses successfully intercepted a significant portion of the 103 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) launched by Russia overnight. Fifty-two UAVs were directly destroyed by Ukrainian defenses.
The remaining 51 UAVs present a more complex picture. A notable 44 of these UAVs vanished from radar, raising questions about their fate. Several possibilities exist: the drones may have malfunctioned and crashed in remote areas, experienced electronic jamming which disrupted their systems and course, or even been redirected. Whatever the reason, their disappearance suggests a measure of success for Ukrainian countermeasures beyond simply shooting them down.
The effectiveness of the Ukrainian response raises interesting economic considerations. While it’s almost always more expensive to intercept a missile or UAV than to produce one, the cost must be weighed against the potential damage prevented. The destruction of 52 UAVs and the incapacitation of 44 more represents a significant reduction in the potential for damage to civilian infrastructure and military assets. The economic value of preventing this damage likely far outweighs the cost of the defensive systems used. This is especially true when considering the economic impact of prolonged conflict and the disruption to Ukrainian society. In short, the expenditure on air defense is a worthwhile investment to preserve the economy, lives and infrastructure, in the context of a larger war.
The high number of UAVs intercepted—96 out of 103, or approximately 93%—is itself a remarkable statistic. This highlights not only the effectiveness of the Ukrainian air defenses, but also potentially some shortcomings in the Russian tactic of saturating the defenses with a large number of relatively inexpensive drones. While a swarm tactic might seem initially effective, it appears the Ukrainians have developed effective countermeasures to address such an approach. Simply sending more drones may not overwhelm the Ukrainian air defenses if the current interception rate remains consistent.
The debate over the cost of interception versus the cost of damage prevention extends beyond simple financial calculations. The human cost must also be taken into account. Each intercepted UAV represents potential casualties and destruction avoided. The value of human life and the safeguarding of civilian infrastructure far surpasses any monetary cost associated with air defense systems.
The fact that a large number of drones disappeared from radar suggests Ukrainian electronic warfare capabilities have played a critical role. This element is crucial because of its ability to disrupt and disable drones without expending expensive ammunition. The combination of direct interception and electronic countermeasures appears to have created a highly effective layered defense strategy. It also emphasizes the importance of ongoing technological development and the support of international partners in providing Ukraine with the necessary tools to combat drone attacks.
This incident serves as a valuable case study in modern asymmetric warfare. Russia’s reliance on inexpensive UAVs as a weapon against a more technologically advanced adversary demonstrates the complexities of balancing cost and effectiveness. The incident’s success in intercepting the vast majority of the launched UAVs shows the adaptability of Ukrainian forces and the potency of the defensive systems supplied by their allies. The high interception rate makes this a clear victory for Ukraine, regardless of the exact cost analysis of the defense against the offense. While a full cost-benefit assessment might be complex, the preservation of lives and critical infrastructure clearly outweighs the expenditure of resources on air defense. The fact that Ukrainian forces were able to thwart a significant portion of the Russian attack serves as a testament to their resilience and the effectiveness of their defense mechanisms.