> If Lockheed Martin starts selling the drones at $30k a pop, I don't understand why they'd be better than a missile. Well a Javelin costs[1] around $200k, so

> If Lockheed Martin starts selling the drones at $30k a pop, I don't understand why they'd be better than a missile. Well a Javelin costs[1] around $200k, so if the alternative is just $30k then that seems like a great deal just there. But a drone offers different capabilities. In particular they can hunt to some degree and you can launch one without immediately giving up your position. That means it's much safer for the operators. Against distant but more stationary targets, one can take more time to navigate them close to critical weak spots, so you potentially need much less explosives to get the job done. Just look at what Ukraine did against those bombers[2] in Russia. Less explosives means you can make a smaller drone which is less detectable, harder to counter and easier to carry. [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/29/how-this-us-made-176000-anti-tank-weapon-could-change-the-war-in-ukraine.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/29/how-this-us-made-176000-anti... [2]: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1ld7ppre9vo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1ld7ppre9vo