8 ms·

Mysterious drones have been spotted at airports across Europe

55 points by fumblebee 11mo ago

Yokolos 11mo ago
If we see a war between Russia and the EU, we're going to have to deal with them learning from Israel and using the same idea of decentralised drone hubs attacking military and civilian targets across the entire continent. We're woefully underprepared to deal with something like this. Western Europe still thinks that if a war breaks out, it'll be tanks and soldiers going into the Baltic states, and we'll crush them with our advanced arsenal. It'll be more like when Russia took eastern Ukraine. A hard push, then months of digging in as they proceed to genocide the Baltics, gaslight the West into thinking it'd be easier and safer to just hand over the Baltics without a big fight and wage asymmetric warfare across Europe and severely hamper any military response by hitting the logistic chains at every point.
- billy99k 11mo ago
  Do you really think after years of crushing defeats in battle and sanctions, that they have the money or soldiers to fight the EU? If they did, they would have taken over Ukraine by now. Now if China gets involved? It's a different story.
  - immibis 11mo ago
    They don't need money or soldiers, but drones.
    - victorbjorklund 11mo ago
      How would they get drones without money or soldiers?
      - aduwah 11mo ago
        Oil still flowing
        deleted 11mo ago
        [deleted]
        Y-bar 11mo ago
        Yup. China, Turkey, and India are main buyers of Russian oil at the moment: https://energyandcleanair.org/october-2025-monthly-analysis-of-russian-fossil-fuel-exports-and-sanctions/ https://energyandcleanair.org/october-2025-monthly-analysis-...
        deleted 11mo ago
        [deleted]
        victorbjorklund 11mo ago
        So money? And oil is down a lot. They even have fuel shortages in Russia. They have to import fuel.
  - gambiting 11mo ago
    If you read what top generals in various countries in the EU are saying(especially on the East side), their main concern is that Russia is making thousands of brand new tanks, cannons, support vehicles......and they are all going into storage. Very few are actually getting sent to Ukraine. If these guys are saying that large scale conflict with Russia seems almost inevitable within few years.....what qualifications do I have to disagree with them? Obviously I don't want this to be true - far from it.
    - pdabbadabba 11mo ago
      I’ve never heard anyone say this. Source?
      - Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
        I'm also curious, why would Russia continue to send thousands to their deaths while holding back supplies and stuff? Unless it's intentional to appear weaker than they are. But I don't see how that would work, unless the US is intentionally witholding intel from their allies - the US, since the invention of spaceflight, has had spy sattelites trained at Russia and they would see large accumulations and transports of tanks and tank parts.
        gambiting 11mo ago
        Ok I spent the last hour looking for this interview and I honestly can't find it - the closest I can get to the source is this article saying that Russia is building a strategic reserve of tanks: https://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/7%2C114881%2C32065846%2Cniepokojace-wiesci-z-rosji-media-coraz-wiecej-czolgow-fabryki.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/7%2C114881%2C3206584... But it's not the one I read which was literally a general saying "they are building tanks and not sending them to the front - why if not to fight with NATO eventually".
        pdabbadabba 11mo ago
        Thanks. This is useful (in English translation): > Russian factories are working at full speed, producing new tanks and repairing those that have been dusty for years," writes "Le Figaro". The French daily refers to its sources and data from independent study groups. On the other hand, experts also point to the fact that this year the losses of the Russians have decreased - this year it was only 200 tanks. According to the newspaper, this may be due to the fact that the participation of these vehicles in the fighting at the front has been reduced. This, in turn, is the result of greater use of drones. This actually strikes me as fairly plausible: it suggests that Russia has decided that tanks are not ideally suited for the current drone war in Ukraine. So they're continuing to ramp up production, but aren't (at this point) sending them to the front. This doesn't necessarily mean that they have a long-term plan to invade NATO, however. I can think of many other scenarios where it would be in Russia's strategic interest to have a large modernized tank force in reserve.
  - kakacik 11mo ago
    Don't underestimate lack if willingness of EU folks to see their dead, or have hospitals or kindergardens bombed by russians on purpose, just like they routinely do in Ukraine. Maybe it can bring on more resistance but I wouldn't hold my breath, european population right now is weak. Also russia has firm footing in EU politics already - for example every single far right group is parroting russian propaganda even when directly aimed against given country. It took decades to build to sow division in whole EU and they are using it now to their fullest. [EDIT] Gotta love the downvotes, I am just describing what I see across whole EU including my own country. Would love some constructive feedback but this is clearly a touchy topic for many folks
  - DocTomoe 11mo ago
    It's Schroedinger's Red Army: Too incompetent and weak to conquer a third-rate power, but prepared and willing o attack NATO-coordinated Western Europe any day now. Such is propaganda: You need to keep the population in fear so they will follow your policies.
  - Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
    If China gets involved directly (e.g. not through supplies) then the conflict will escalate; no party wants to escalate this, and for years now this has been a tight-rope proxy war of sorts, where Europe and the US try to support Ukraine as much as possible without being directly involved. Likewise, Russia has been getting supplies and people from their allies.
    - red-iron-pine 11mo ago
      the key difference is that China and Russia have direct borders and land beefs; they may well be rivals, but it's easy for China to feed them tech and learn from their mistakes while getting a serious cut (25% or more) on oil. discount at the gas station while a potential rival hollows itself out and turns into the Canada of China -- a mostly empty resource hub that follows your lead
- littlestymaar 11mo ago
  I'm not convinced by your conclusion. I mean of course drones would be a massive problem for western forces as they have never faced that kind of threat at scale. But at the same time the Russian army has suffered dramatic attrition in Ukraine, especially in anti-air capabilities which used to be USSR's specialty and which western analyst feared it would allow the Russians to perform wide anti access on the Baltic's while they would quickly take over the Suvalki corridor and the whole Baltic states soon after. With limited maneuvering capability left to quickly overwhelm local land armies and a significantly diminished air defense asset, I think the Russians would just lose the sky very quickly and then be unable to supply their ground forces. And I really don't think Putin wants to lose a quick conventional war and end up with just the nuclear deterrence as his only card so I'm not too worried about him attacking EU directly. (But then again it made little sense to attack Ukraine in the first place yet he did it no matter what, so who knows…) (Had the Ukrainian army collapsed and the 2022 campaign gone as planned by the Russian command, then the prospects would have been extremely grim for the Baltic states and the European Union as a whole. We Europeans collectively owe a lot to the Ukrainians).
  - sigwinch 11mo ago
    On the topic of what Putin wants, I’m increasingly swayed that domestic politics limit the choices he’s given. I wonder how the same siloviki but a different leader would perform. On the topic of a wide drone attack coinciding with land invasion, I think (rightly or wrongly) the drone attack will be attributed to Russia early. Even though the life of a Russian soldier is approximately the same as a drone, it’d be very helpful for Russia to manifest the drones in support of some other origin of the troops.
    - AnimalMuppet 11mo ago
      Could you expand a bit on what you mean by your first paragraph?
      - sigwinch 11mo ago
        History shows periods of opaque infighting within a closed circle of security barons. The west did not know Khrushchev was positioned for power until that ring met with Eisenhower for arms talks, and Khrushchev was the one standing next to Eisenhower at the buffet. I think the West now expects a complex and probably mortal fight for succession, with the Patruchevs being favored right now. I’ve heard people talking about factions: one ensuring Putin’s physical security; another ensuring a continuity of their power so that oligarchs and siloviki are indivisibly secure.
- bluGill 11mo ago
  The EU military leaders are watching Ukraine closely (as is any other competent military leader anywhere in the world) and trying to figure out how they will handle this problems. The EU is also talking to Ukraine military leaders and brainstorming solutions that Ukraine is trying in real time (not all military leaders are, but a lot of countries outside of the EU are). The EU is also designing new weapons/systems with the current situation in mind, it is likely that these (whatever they are - this is classified but I can say it with confidence anyway because it is so obvious there is no way they are not doing something) will be ready before Russia attacks.
- slightwinder 11mo ago
  > Western Europe still thinks that if a war breaks out, it'll be tanks and soldiers going into the Baltic states, and we'll crush them with our advanced arsenal. Drones are not for conquering, but destruction. We see this in Ukraine now, where Drones are not making the whole war, but are just one gear of the machinery. And Western leaders know this, they are preparing Drones, but refitting the western machinery takes time. Probably one reason why they seem busy to bind Russia in Ukraine.
  - Yokolos 11mo ago
    > Drones are not for conquering, but destruction. Yes, and we have plenty of infrastructure to destroy. It's a target rich environment. > And Western leaders know this, they are preparing Drones I've seen zero indication that this is true. Do you have sources that we're in any way preparing for a large-scale drone war?
    - slightwinder 11mo ago
      > Yes, and we have plenty of infrastructure to destroy. It's a target rich environment. Yes, but how is that relevant? Everything is always open for terror. Russia itself is not safe either. Or are you assuming Russia is out for pure blind destruction? Degrading themselves to become lousy terrorists? Just spreading destruction for no reason? I would assume they at least will have some aim and reasoning behind their targets, which would mean they will come with soldiers and tanks, and conquer land, or destroy the highest profile-targets. In the first case, they will have very limited resources to spare for attacks on middle European targets. For the second case, you only need to focus your defence on those targets. > I've seen zero indication that this is true. May you are following the wrong sources? Building up drones-defence is in progress for a while now. Whether it's going well is a different story, but I would assume that they will not talk very openly about those things for obvious reasons.
    - red-iron-pine 11mo ago
      there was literally an article just the other day about the US buying a million drones and building the capacity to continue that level of To&E
mavhc 11mo ago
[flagged]
- billy99k 11mo ago
  Just what we need. They stopped Nuclear energy from taking over in the 70s and 80s, why not destroy Air travel too?
  - rdtsc 11mo ago
    Further realization — Russians don’t have to fly drones or sabotage things, they could just “encourage” eco warriors. I mean they would still be using drones but the drones are just human. Suddenly wondering if there is any history of Russians/Soviets “sponsoring” the groups who were after Germany shutting down its nuclear reactors…
  - mavhc 11mo ago
    Probably not the same people. Air travel is hard to decarbonise, so needs to be limited
- anonym29 11mo ago
  Right, because nothing screams "I love the environment" like replacing one five hour flight with 200 48 hour internal combustion car road trips.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
  - zimpenfish 11mo ago
    Only if every car has only one person - once you start getting 2 or more people in a car, driving starts to win[0] (and that's discounting the heavy multiplier you get from things like coaches and buses.) [0] https://terrapass.com/blog/carbon-footprint-of-driving-vs-flying-whats-best-for-the-earth/ https://terrapass.com/blog/carbon-footprint-of-driving-vs-fl...
boriskourt 11mo ago
Not a bad overview of the situation! Worth it for some of the questions about what is actually efficient and not just technically effective. Especially at this scale. > "The aggressor", he concludes, "will observe, adjust, repeat – until they get through". Reminds me a lot of digital sec.
- baq 11mo ago
  it's just security, digital or not. sun tzu's art of war is timeless and widely applicable (including outside of the military or even security domains) for a reason.
modzu 11mo ago
before ukraine it was aliens
- mikkupikku 11mo ago
  (It was drones then too.)
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
Toutouxc 11mo ago
I still haven’t seen any specifics on the type of drones spotted at those airports. Is the other side just sending random people with cheap FPV drones? Or are they flying Shaheds around airports? I could take my 6” FPV drone and go buzz the tower at a nearby international airport, if I wanted. It costs less than 500€ for the entire kit and with ELRS and high power analog VTx you can do it from kilometers away and run before they catch you. Obviously it’s illegal as fuck.
- sigwinch 11mo ago
  I heard it’s a mix. Suggestible local people on Telegram are coaxed to launch civilian stuff at a time and place. This clouds the sensor data of the true launches. I don’t know if we’ve seen Shahads since 10 September, but note that Shahads can be ship-launched as well.
  - mosst 11mo ago
    So this is happening in the EU? I only heard about such cases happening in Russia. Where did you read about this?
    - sigwinch 11mo ago
      It’s well documented, Latvia, Poland, and it takes time to build the case so there are probably more. https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/may/04/these-people-are-disposable-how-russia-is-using-online-recruits-for-a-campaign-of-sabotage-in-europe https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/may/04... https://meduza.io/en/feature/2025/01/16/we-need-eyes-and-ears https://meduza.io/en/feature/2025/01/16/we-need-eyes-and-ear...
- ACCount37 11mo ago
  Civilian drones most of the time. It's thought that it's Russian illegal agents doing this. A lot of them locals recruited online. Really cheap ops done by really cheap people, using cheap and deniable gear.
__alexs 11mo ago
Is this like that time we closed Gatwick for 3 days because of a collective delusion? Every news report I read about this stuff has at best /r/ufos level of uselessly vague photography.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- zipy124 11mo ago
  I was there for that, ended up getting the eurostart instead, still can't believe that it was basically all for nothing and we still have no information about it really.
thatgerhard 11mo ago
[flagged]
- monooso 11mo ago
  Oh hai Donald.
- sigwinch 11mo ago
  A few people have great information on drones. Why would they become sources for RT?
- Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
  If you make a bold claim like that I hope you have the sources to back it up. News outlets spreading misinformation is a criminal act; it was in the UK's 2003 Communications Act [0] and has been updated in the 2023 Online Safety Act [1], with some people already having been convicted [2] for spreading misinformation. [0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 [1] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/section/179 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/section/179 [2] https://www.derbyshire.police.uk/news/derbyshire/news/news/south/2024/august/man-jailed-after-fake-claim-on-tiktok-video-that-he-was-running-for-his-life-from-rioters/ https://www.derbyshire.police.uk/news/derbyshire/news/news/s...
  - mosst 11mo ago
    Exactly, there's a difference between spreading information that is factually incorrect and reporting (or not reporting) information in a way that is misleading.
randomNumber7 11mo ago
The way the german government reacts to this makes it pretty easy for any lone actor to do state level damage.
- Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
  That's why I don't understand why there isn't a more aggressive response to flying drones illegally near airports. IMO they should just be shot down. Actually some years they were very proudly showing birds of prey that they had trained to do just that. Whatever happened to that? After 9/11 there was a huge worldwide shift in e.g. airplane security due to the threat of terrorism, but now there's drones out there they can fly into planes or that can drop bombs they're doing... what? Mentioning it in the news?
  - FinnKuhn 11mo ago
    How do you expect to shoot them down? They are small and very quick and disappear shortly after appearing.
    - jiehong 11mo ago
      Stand-by drone-intercepting drones? Tracking them is a need first and foremost. How about a down-facing radar on top of the Aviation Control Tower?
      - FinnKuhn 11mo ago
        I think the issue is response time. Once a drone has been spotted notifying the correct person and getting the drone started would take a few minutes I assume. Furthermore you can't really deploy a drone at an airport while it is still active, which is the reason they are banned from operating there in the first place.
        jiehong 11mo ago
        I was about to counter your first part with automatic detection and drone launching, but your second point makes sense.
Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
I dunno if calling them "mysterious" is really helpful in this case. Just shoot them down if they get close, that should be the response in a wartime scenario too. Plus, given it's in civilian areas, they can use the expensive laser defense systems to do that.
- an0malous 11mo ago
  The mysteriousness is the main point of the article. These drones aren’t identifiable. Across dozens of incursions this year alone, no one has taken any drone down or identified where they’re launching from or returning to in spite of all the advanced NATO satellite imagery and aerial surveillance that can identify individual people on the ground.
- AnimalMuppet 11mo ago
  The problem with this is, if you shoot and miss, the bullet goes somewhere. Airports are near cities, and there tend to be people "down range".
  - red-iron-pine 11mo ago
    nah most airports ain't. not all of em mind you, but usually you keep people away these projectiles aren't going to travel 9km unless you're shooting off SAMs or other serious AA i'd be more worried about FOD on the runways getting sucked into an engine or popping the tires of service vehicles
skc 11mo ago
The fact that these drones are only appearing in NATO aligned countries makes it seem pretty obvious to me that it's one of two possibilities. 1) Russian sabre-rattling 2) NATO countries running "secret" drills in public in anticipation of 1) The UFO community is of course running with a third option that doesn't warrant any seriousness.
- infecto 11mo ago
  I would not rule out China out either. Let’s not forget some of their recent state backed exploits as well as the “weather” balloon that flew over America.
  - red-iron-pine 11mo ago
    why is China flying drones over Italy? is Italy a big backer of Taiwanese independence? it is almost certainly Russia, or NATO running drills. also don't underestimate idiots and assholes in the same way that incoming flights to airports still have to deal with people shining laser pointers at them on an irregular but not uncommon basis
    - infecto 11mo ago
      It most likely is Russia but China is always worth considering. They have a strategic partnership and have been part of many probes into western nations both physical and digital. I would not doubt it’s Russia but I think it’s good to always consider the possibilities. China is as much of an adversary to the west as Russia but they are a lot smarter about it.
- tarsinge 11mo ago
  If you take into account the silence from officials and politicians then 2) seems more likely.
  - spwa4 11mo ago
    Officials aren't silent on these matters. Very embarassed at their total inability to do something about it, is how I'd describe it.
jiehong 11mo ago
One thing that is particularly annoying: the lack of communication from the governments/police about the status of the investigation, or lack thereof. Side question: How likely are autonomous reconnaissance drones today? I'd expect them to be impervious to traditional jamming. I could imagine a pair of drones, a few km apart, communicating by laser line-of-sight, where the reconnaissance one acquires data, send it to the nearby drone, that one would use it to confirm data and do something else with it (aka, spotter and actor).
- rapsey 11mo ago
  > the lack of communication from the governments/police about the status of the investigation, or lack thereof. Because they are doing it to stir up public hysteria.
mastax 11mo ago
Have they been conclusively spotted? With evidence? Sorry I only skimmed the article. Until there is, I’m going to keep believing it’s some sort of mass delusion like UFO sightings. Not because I think some sort of drone attack is particularly unlikely, but because these sorts of mass delusions are evidently very common - like happened in New Jersey.
- sigwinch 11mo ago
  9 September is probably where you want to start. Intentional swarm of military drones into NATO. Shahads shot down, no question about a Russian plan to test reactions along the perimeter. Since then, coordinated launches of screens of smaller civilian drones. I don’t think we’ll get hard numbers, but I’ve heard that NATO is more interested in ground-detection of GPS and satellite uplink jamming. So the question now is: how are some civilians coordinating within NATO countries, and how are they getting drones that can jam?
- Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
  Don't they show up on radar? I have no reason to doubt the detection of drones around airports and other infrastructure, especially given they already have enforced drone bans and therefore have installations specifically designed to detect and track drones.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
justsomejew 11mo ago
It is not Russia's aggression "against the west", it is your aggression against Russia, and in general against Russians, since the west organized the Kiev's coup at 2014 (renember the Odessa May 2014 pogrom at the Unions House against people opposing to "Maidan", for which none, or almost none, got punished, or the murders by ucranian services at Mariupol, of which most of the westerners did not hear at all). Ucrainian war is just the logical outcome, were it not for your built-in dishonesty and hypocrisy which make it seem as a spontaneous aggression against a peaceful neighbour. (I am not saying this is the whole story. But the main part of it, yes.)
justsomejew 11mo ago
I am quite sure that these "mysterious drones" which the western services "cannot identify" is yet another "false flag" as you like to call them, to justify investing hindreds of billions (maybe also these stolen from Russia) into a future war against Russia which the west is feverishly preparing. Territory, natural resources, this is what it is about. Always is, always has been.

55 points by fumblebee 11mo ago

If we see a war between Russia and the EU, we're going to have to deal with them learning from Israel and using the same idea of decentralised drone hubs attacking military and civilian targets across the entire continent. We're woefully underprepared to deal with something like this. Western Europe still thinks that if a war breaks out, it'll be tanks and soldiers going into the Baltic states, and we'll crush them with our advanced arsenal. It'll be more like when Russia took eastern Ukraine. A hard push, then months of digging in as they proceed to genocide the Baltics, gaslight the West into thinking it'd be easier and safer to just hand over the Baltics without a big fight and wage asymmetric warfare across Europe and severely hamper any military response by hitting the logistic chains at every point.

billy99k 11mo ago
Do you really think after years of crushing defeats in battle and sanctions, that they have the money or soldiers to fight the EU? If they did, they would have taken over Ukraine by now. Now if China gets involved? It's a different story.
- immibis 11mo ago
  They don't need money or soldiers, but drones.
  - victorbjorklund 11mo ago
    How would they get drones without money or soldiers?
    - aduwah 11mo ago
      Oil still flowing
      - deleted 11mo ago
        [deleted]
      - Y-bar 11mo ago
        Yup. China, Turkey, and India are main buyers of Russian oil at the moment: https://energyandcleanair.org/october-2025-monthly-analysis-of-russian-fossil-fuel-exports-and-sanctions/ https://energyandcleanair.org/october-2025-monthly-analysis-...
      - deleted 11mo ago
        [deleted]
      - victorbjorklund 11mo ago
        So money? And oil is down a lot. They even have fuel shortages in Russia. They have to import fuel.
- gambiting 11mo ago
  If you read what top generals in various countries in the EU are saying(especially on the East side), their main concern is that Russia is making thousands of brand new tanks, cannons, support vehicles......and they are all going into storage. Very few are actually getting sent to Ukraine. If these guys are saying that large scale conflict with Russia seems almost inevitable within few years.....what qualifications do I have to disagree with them? Obviously I don't want this to be true - far from it.
  - pdabbadabba 11mo ago
    I’ve never heard anyone say this. Source?
    - Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
      I'm also curious, why would Russia continue to send thousands to their deaths while holding back supplies and stuff? Unless it's intentional to appear weaker than they are. But I don't see how that would work, unless the US is intentionally witholding intel from their allies - the US, since the invention of spaceflight, has had spy sattelites trained at Russia and they would see large accumulations and transports of tanks and tank parts.
      - gambiting 11mo ago
        Ok I spent the last hour looking for this interview and I honestly can't find it - the closest I can get to the source is this article saying that Russia is building a strategic reserve of tanks: https://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/7%2C114881%2C32065846%2Cniepokojace-wiesci-z-rosji-media-coraz-wiecej-czolgow-fabryki.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/7%2C114881%2C3206584... But it's not the one I read which was literally a general saying "they are building tanks and not sending them to the front - why if not to fight with NATO eventually".
        pdabbadabba 11mo ago
        Thanks. This is useful (in English translation): > Russian factories are working at full speed, producing new tanks and repairing those that have been dusty for years," writes "Le Figaro". The French daily refers to its sources and data from independent study groups. On the other hand, experts also point to the fact that this year the losses of the Russians have decreased - this year it was only 200 tanks. According to the newspaper, this may be due to the fact that the participation of these vehicles in the fighting at the front has been reduced. This, in turn, is the result of greater use of drones. This actually strikes me as fairly plausible: it suggests that Russia has decided that tanks are not ideally suited for the current drone war in Ukraine. So they're continuing to ramp up production, but aren't (at this point) sending them to the front. This doesn't necessarily mean that they have a long-term plan to invade NATO, however. I can think of many other scenarios where it would be in Russia's strategic interest to have a large modernized tank force in reserve.
- kakacik 11mo ago
  Don't underestimate lack if willingness of EU folks to see their dead, or have hospitals or kindergardens bombed by russians on purpose, just like they routinely do in Ukraine. Maybe it can bring on more resistance but I wouldn't hold my breath, european population right now is weak. Also russia has firm footing in EU politics already - for example every single far right group is parroting russian propaganda even when directly aimed against given country. It took decades to build to sow division in whole EU and they are using it now to their fullest. [EDIT] Gotta love the downvotes, I am just describing what I see across whole EU including my own country. Would love some constructive feedback but this is clearly a touchy topic for many folks
- DocTomoe 11mo ago
  It's Schroedinger's Red Army: Too incompetent and weak to conquer a third-rate power, but prepared and willing o attack NATO-coordinated Western Europe any day now. Such is propaganda: You need to keep the population in fear so they will follow your policies.
- Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
  If China gets involved directly (e.g. not through supplies) then the conflict will escalate; no party wants to escalate this, and for years now this has been a tight-rope proxy war of sorts, where Europe and the US try to support Ukraine as much as possible without being directly involved. Likewise, Russia has been getting supplies and people from their allies.
  - red-iron-pine 11mo ago
    the key difference is that China and Russia have direct borders and land beefs; they may well be rivals, but it's easy for China to feed them tech and learn from their mistakes while getting a serious cut (25% or more) on oil. discount at the gas station while a potential rival hollows itself out and turns into the Canada of China -- a mostly empty resource hub that follows your lead
littlestymaar 11mo ago
I'm not convinced by your conclusion. I mean of course drones would be a massive problem for western forces as they have never faced that kind of threat at scale. But at the same time the Russian army has suffered dramatic attrition in Ukraine, especially in anti-air capabilities which used to be USSR's specialty and which western analyst feared it would allow the Russians to perform wide anti access on the Baltic's while they would quickly take over the Suvalki corridor and the whole Baltic states soon after. With limited maneuvering capability left to quickly overwhelm local land armies and a significantly diminished air defense asset, I think the Russians would just lose the sky very quickly and then be unable to supply their ground forces. And I really don't think Putin wants to lose a quick conventional war and end up with just the nuclear deterrence as his only card so I'm not too worried about him attacking EU directly. (But then again it made little sense to attack Ukraine in the first place yet he did it no matter what, so who knows…) (Had the Ukrainian army collapsed and the 2022 campaign gone as planned by the Russian command, then the prospects would have been extremely grim for the Baltic states and the European Union as a whole. We Europeans collectively owe a lot to the Ukrainians).
- sigwinch 11mo ago
  On the topic of what Putin wants, I’m increasingly swayed that domestic politics limit the choices he’s given. I wonder how the same siloviki but a different leader would perform. On the topic of a wide drone attack coinciding with land invasion, I think (rightly or wrongly) the drone attack will be attributed to Russia early. Even though the life of a Russian soldier is approximately the same as a drone, it’d be very helpful for Russia to manifest the drones in support of some other origin of the troops.
  - AnimalMuppet 11mo ago
    Could you expand a bit on what you mean by your first paragraph?
    - sigwinch 11mo ago
      History shows periods of opaque infighting within a closed circle of security barons. The west did not know Khrushchev was positioned for power until that ring met with Eisenhower for arms talks, and Khrushchev was the one standing next to Eisenhower at the buffet. I think the West now expects a complex and probably mortal fight for succession, with the Patruchevs being favored right now. I’ve heard people talking about factions: one ensuring Putin’s physical security; another ensuring a continuity of their power so that oligarchs and siloviki are indivisibly secure.
bluGill 11mo ago
The EU military leaders are watching Ukraine closely (as is any other competent military leader anywhere in the world) and trying to figure out how they will handle this problems. The EU is also talking to Ukraine military leaders and brainstorming solutions that Ukraine is trying in real time (not all military leaders are, but a lot of countries outside of the EU are). The EU is also designing new weapons/systems with the current situation in mind, it is likely that these (whatever they are - this is classified but I can say it with confidence anyway because it is so obvious there is no way they are not doing something) will be ready before Russia attacks.
slightwinder 11mo ago
> Western Europe still thinks that if a war breaks out, it'll be tanks and soldiers going into the Baltic states, and we'll crush them with our advanced arsenal. Drones are not for conquering, but destruction. We see this in Ukraine now, where Drones are not making the whole war, but are just one gear of the machinery. And Western leaders know this, they are preparing Drones, but refitting the western machinery takes time. Probably one reason why they seem busy to bind Russia in Ukraine.
- Yokolos 11mo ago
  > Drones are not for conquering, but destruction. Yes, and we have plenty of infrastructure to destroy. It's a target rich environment. > And Western leaders know this, they are preparing Drones I've seen zero indication that this is true. Do you have sources that we're in any way preparing for a large-scale drone war?
  - slightwinder 11mo ago
    > Yes, and we have plenty of infrastructure to destroy. It's a target rich environment. Yes, but how is that relevant? Everything is always open for terror. Russia itself is not safe either. Or are you assuming Russia is out for pure blind destruction? Degrading themselves to become lousy terrorists? Just spreading destruction for no reason? I would assume they at least will have some aim and reasoning behind their targets, which would mean they will come with soldiers and tanks, and conquer land, or destroy the highest profile-targets. In the first case, they will have very limited resources to spare for attacks on middle European targets. For the second case, you only need to focus your defence on those targets. > I've seen zero indication that this is true. May you are following the wrong sources? Building up drones-defence is in progress for a while now. Whether it's going well is a different story, but I would assume that they will not talk very openly about those things for obvious reasons.
  - red-iron-pine 11mo ago
    there was literally an article just the other day about the US buying a million drones and building the capacity to continue that level of To&E

mavhc 11mo ago

[flagged]

billy99k 11mo ago
Just what we need. They stopped Nuclear energy from taking over in the 70s and 80s, why not destroy Air travel too?
- rdtsc 11mo ago
  Further realization — Russians don’t have to fly drones or sabotage things, they could just “encourage” eco warriors. I mean they would still be using drones but the drones are just human. Suddenly wondering if there is any history of Russians/Soviets “sponsoring” the groups who were after Germany shutting down its nuclear reactors…
- mavhc 11mo ago
  Probably not the same people. Air travel is hard to decarbonise, so needs to be limited
anonym29 11mo ago
Right, because nothing screams "I love the environment" like replacing one five hour flight with 200 48 hour internal combustion car road trips.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- zimpenfish 11mo ago
  Only if every car has only one person - once you start getting 2 or more people in a car, driving starts to win[0] (and that's discounting the heavy multiplier you get from things like coaches and buses.) [0] https://terrapass.com/blog/carbon-footprint-of-driving-vs-flying-whats-best-for-the-earth/ https://terrapass.com/blog/carbon-footprint-of-driving-vs-fl...

boriskourt 11mo ago

Not a bad overview of the situation! Worth it for some of the questions about what is actually efficient and not just technically effective. Especially at this scale. > "The aggressor", he concludes, "will observe, adjust, repeat – until they get through". Reminds me a lot of digital sec.

baq 11mo ago
it's just security, digital or not. sun tzu's art of war is timeless and widely applicable (including outside of the military or even security domains) for a reason.

modzu 11mo ago

before ukraine it was aliens

mikkupikku 11mo ago
(It was drones then too.)
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]

Toutouxc 11mo ago

I still haven’t seen any specifics on the type of drones spotted at those airports. Is the other side just sending random people with cheap FPV drones? Or are they flying Shaheds around airports? I could take my 6” FPV drone and go buzz the tower at a nearby international airport, if I wanted. It costs less than 500€ for the entire kit and with ELRS and high power analog VTx you can do it from kilometers away and run before they catch you. Obviously it’s illegal as fuck.

sigwinch 11mo ago
I heard it’s a mix. Suggestible local people on Telegram are coaxed to launch civilian stuff at a time and place. This clouds the sensor data of the true launches. I don’t know if we’ve seen Shahads since 10 September, but note that Shahads can be ship-launched as well.
- mosst 11mo ago
  So this is happening in the EU? I only heard about such cases happening in Russia. Where did you read about this?
  - sigwinch 11mo ago
    It’s well documented, Latvia, Poland, and it takes time to build the case so there are probably more. https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/may/04/these-people-are-disposable-how-russia-is-using-online-recruits-for-a-campaign-of-sabotage-in-europe https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/may/04... https://meduza.io/en/feature/2025/01/16/we-need-eyes-and-ears https://meduza.io/en/feature/2025/01/16/we-need-eyes-and-ear...
ACCount37 11mo ago
Civilian drones most of the time. It's thought that it's Russian illegal agents doing this. A lot of them locals recruited online. Really cheap ops done by really cheap people, using cheap and deniable gear.

__alexs 11mo ago

Is this like that time we closed Gatwick for 3 days because of a collective delusion? Every news report I read about this stuff has at best /r/ufos level of uselessly vague photography.

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
zipy124 11mo ago
I was there for that, ended up getting the eurostart instead, still can't believe that it was basically all for nothing and we still have no information about it really.

thatgerhard 11mo ago

[flagged]

monooso 11mo ago
Oh hai Donald.
sigwinch 11mo ago
A few people have great information on drones. Why would they become sources for RT?
Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
If you make a bold claim like that I hope you have the sources to back it up. News outlets spreading misinformation is a criminal act; it was in the UK's 2003 Communications Act [0] and has been updated in the 2023 Online Safety Act [1], with some people already having been convicted [2] for spreading misinformation. [0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 [1] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/section/179 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/section/179 [2] https://www.derbyshire.police.uk/news/derbyshire/news/news/south/2024/august/man-jailed-after-fake-claim-on-tiktok-video-that-he-was-running-for-his-life-from-rioters/ https://www.derbyshire.police.uk/news/derbyshire/news/news/s...
- mosst 11mo ago
  Exactly, there's a difference between spreading information that is factually incorrect and reporting (or not reporting) information in a way that is misleading.

randomNumber7 11mo ago

The way the german government reacts to this makes it pretty easy for any lone actor to do state level damage.

Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
That's why I don't understand why there isn't a more aggressive response to flying drones illegally near airports. IMO they should just be shot down. Actually some years they were very proudly showing birds of prey that they had trained to do just that. Whatever happened to that? After 9/11 there was a huge worldwide shift in e.g. airplane security due to the threat of terrorism, but now there's drones out there they can fly into planes or that can drop bombs they're doing... what? Mentioning it in the news?
- FinnKuhn 11mo ago
  How do you expect to shoot them down? They are small and very quick and disappear shortly after appearing.
  - jiehong 11mo ago
    Stand-by drone-intercepting drones? Tracking them is a need first and foremost. How about a down-facing radar on top of the Aviation Control Tower?
    - FinnKuhn 11mo ago
      I think the issue is response time. Once a drone has been spotted notifying the correct person and getting the drone started would take a few minutes I assume. Furthermore you can't really deploy a drone at an airport while it is still active, which is the reason they are banned from operating there in the first place.
      - jiehong 11mo ago
        I was about to counter your first part with automatic detection and drone launching, but your second point makes sense.

Cthulhu_ 11mo ago

I dunno if calling them "mysterious" is really helpful in this case. Just shoot them down if they get close, that should be the response in a wartime scenario too. Plus, given it's in civilian areas, they can use the expensive laser defense systems to do that.

an0malous 11mo ago
The mysteriousness is the main point of the article. These drones aren’t identifiable. Across dozens of incursions this year alone, no one has taken any drone down or identified where they’re launching from or returning to in spite of all the advanced NATO satellite imagery and aerial surveillance that can identify individual people on the ground.
AnimalMuppet 11mo ago
The problem with this is, if you shoot and miss, the bullet goes somewhere. Airports are near cities, and there tend to be people "down range".
- red-iron-pine 11mo ago
  nah most airports ain't. not all of em mind you, but usually you keep people away these projectiles aren't going to travel 9km unless you're shooting off SAMs or other serious AA i'd be more worried about FOD on the runways getting sucked into an engine or popping the tires of service vehicles

skc 11mo ago

The fact that these drones are only appearing in NATO aligned countries makes it seem pretty obvious to me that it's one of two possibilities. 1) Russian sabre-rattling 2) NATO countries running "secret" drills in public in anticipation of 1) The UFO community is of course running with a third option that doesn't warrant any seriousness.

infecto 11mo ago
I would not rule out China out either. Let’s not forget some of their recent state backed exploits as well as the “weather” balloon that flew over America.
- red-iron-pine 11mo ago
  why is China flying drones over Italy? is Italy a big backer of Taiwanese independence? it is almost certainly Russia, or NATO running drills. also don't underestimate idiots and assholes in the same way that incoming flights to airports still have to deal with people shining laser pointers at them on an irregular but not uncommon basis
  - infecto 11mo ago
    It most likely is Russia but China is always worth considering. They have a strategic partnership and have been part of many probes into western nations both physical and digital. I would not doubt it’s Russia but I think it’s good to always consider the possibilities. China is as much of an adversary to the west as Russia but they are a lot smarter about it.
tarsinge 11mo ago
If you take into account the silence from officials and politicians then 2) seems more likely.
- spwa4 11mo ago
  Officials aren't silent on these matters. Very embarassed at their total inability to do something about it, is how I'd describe it.

jiehong 11mo ago

One thing that is particularly annoying: the lack of communication from the governments/police about the status of the investigation, or lack thereof. Side question: How likely are autonomous reconnaissance drones today? I'd expect them to be impervious to traditional jamming. I could imagine a pair of drones, a few km apart, communicating by laser line-of-sight, where the reconnaissance one acquires data, send it to the nearby drone, that one would use it to confirm data and do something else with it (aka, spotter and actor).

rapsey 11mo ago
> the lack of communication from the governments/police about the status of the investigation, or lack thereof. Because they are doing it to stir up public hysteria.

mastax 11mo ago

Have they been conclusively spotted? With evidence? Sorry I only skimmed the article. Until there is, I’m going to keep believing it’s some sort of mass delusion like UFO sightings. Not because I think some sort of drone attack is particularly unlikely, but because these sorts of mass delusions are evidently very common - like happened in New Jersey.

sigwinch 11mo ago
9 September is probably where you want to start. Intentional swarm of military drones into NATO. Shahads shot down, no question about a Russian plan to test reactions along the perimeter. Since then, coordinated launches of screens of smaller civilian drones. I don’t think we’ll get hard numbers, but I’ve heard that NATO is more interested in ground-detection of GPS and satellite uplink jamming. So the question now is: how are some civilians coordinating within NATO countries, and how are they getting drones that can jam?
Cthulhu_ 11mo ago
Don't they show up on radar? I have no reason to doubt the detection of drones around airports and other infrastructure, especially given they already have enforced drone bans and therefore have installations specifically designed to detect and track drones.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]

justsomejew 11mo ago

It is not Russia's aggression "against the west", it is your aggression against Russia, and in general against Russians, since the west organized the Kiev's coup at 2014 (renember the Odessa May 2014 pogrom at the Unions House against people opposing to "Maidan", for which none, or almost none, got punished, or the murders by ucranian services at Mariupol, of which most of the westerners did not hear at all). Ucrainian war is just the logical outcome, were it not for your built-in dishonesty and hypocrisy which make it seem as a spontaneous aggression against a peaceful neighbour. (I am not saying this is the whole story. But the main part of it, yes.)

justsomejew 11mo ago

I am quite sure that these "mysterious drones" which the western services "cannot identify" is yet another "false flag" as you like to call them, to justify investing hindreds of billions (maybe also these stolen from Russia) into a future war against Russia which the west is feverishly preparing. Territory, natural resources, this is what it is about. Always is, always has been.