Interceptor

WASHINGTON — The U.S. military is experiencing a “beyond critical” shortage of advanced missile interceptors in Europe largely driven by President Trump’s war with Iran, a U.S. defense official in Europe and a NATO official told the Associated Press, raising concerns about vulnerabilities in NATO countries to a potential Russian attack.

The U.S. defense official said the most concerning shortfall involves Patriot missile interceptors, which can shoot down Russia’s high-speed ballistic missiles. The NATO official confirmed the low inventories of Patriots among American and NATO forces in Europe. Both spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters.

In the event of a Russian ballistic missile assault on, for example, a military headquarters or power plant, NATO could be in a similar position to Patriot-starved Ukraine and be forced “to take punch after punch in the mouth,” the U.S. defense official said.

In Europe, the American military “definitely” does not have enough Patriots to stop any possible sustained ballistic missile attack and would have “very limited” capability to defend against a single ballistic missile strike or a stray Russian missile that goes off course, the U.S. official said.

It illustrates the cascading fallout from Trump’s decision to launch a war against Iran, a conflict that reaches the six-month mark on Friday. U.S. missile stocks in Europe have been moved to the Middle East, where U.S. and Gulf allies have fired off significant numbers of interceptors, including Patriots, to thwart Iran’s drones and missiles. Some of those attacks have killed and wounded American troops.

Though a Russian ballistic missile attack against NATO countries is not imminently expected, CIA Director John Ratcliffe went to Moscow this week to warn Russia not to attack, The Wall Street Journal reported. Trump played down the significance of the rare and secretive trip, saying it was “sort of semi-routine.”

European and NATO officials say Russia could be in a position to attack countries in the alliance by 2030. Patriot stockpiles are projected to rebound by then. In the meantime, Russia’s war in Ukraine could hinder its ability to carry out any missile attack on Europe as it would be a challenge for Moscow to fight an air war on two fronts.

U.S. Patriot transfers to Ukraine played a role in the drawdown, but the Iran war wasn’t expected

The Patriot missile shortage is most acutely felt in Ukraine, where officials are begging for more air defense support and where previous U.S. transfers also have drawn down some supply. Kyiv says only U.S.-made Patriots can stop Russia’s advanced ballistic missiles, which increasingly are getting through Ukrainian defenses, including as part of a barrage overnight into Thursday.

The U.S. supplied hundreds of Patriot missiles to Ukraine over the course of the 4 1/2-year-long conflict, but the Iran war was the tipping point for shrinking inventories, said Ed Arnold, senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, a military think tank in London.

The supply to Ukraine was planned for and reasonably measured, he said, whereas stocks in the Middle East have been unexpectedly and quickly drained, exposing supply chain constraints.

The U.S. military in Europe also is grappling with critical shortages of the Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS, a medium-range ballistic missile designed to strike behind enemy lines, the two officials said. But the overall munitions picture in Europe is less dire than on air defenses alone because some European militaries have their own offensive missiles, such as the Taurus and Storm Shadow, which are both long-range air-launched bunker-busting missiles.

U.S. Army Col. Martin O’Donnell, a senior NATO military spokesperson, said it is “simply not the case” that the number of Patriot missiles in Europe is beyond critical.

NATO, he said, is able to “block punches” and has enough air defense munitions available to defend itself as well as to donate to Ukraine.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement Thursday that claims of U.S. munition shortages “are false.”

“We have everything required to strike at the time and place of the President’s choosing,” Parnell said. “Across multiple combatant commands, we have already executed successful operations while maintaining a deep, ready arsenal to defend our people and our interests.”

Europe has few alternatives while stocks are low

The dearth of Patriot interceptors in Europe would leave few alternatives for shooting down Russia’s more advanced ballistic missiles, which can be combined with swarms of inexpensive drones to overwhelm defenses, experts say.

Ukraine and some allies already use systems that can destroy slower-moving drones without expensive missiles. But ballistic missiles are a challenge because they dive steeply toward targets at more than five times the speed of sound, leaving little time to stop them.

The Patriot system tracks the missile, predicts its path and launches within minutes, all while carrying out complex calculations to ensure the interceptor finds its target. One Patriot battery can only cover a limited area: for example, a small military base but not a whole city.

One alternative could be France and Italy’s SAMP/T NG air defense system. France has promised to speed up the delivery of the system — the upgraded version of the current SAMP/T — to Ukraine, which the manufacturer says is better able to counter ballistics.

The new iteration, however, has not yet been battle tested and the current version of the SAMP/T has a smaller range than the Patriot.

While U.S. and European militaries have warships that can serve as mobile air defense, they may be too far from a target to protect it and could risk getting sunk.

Patriot stocks have plunged during the Iran war

Ukraine has received Patriots from American and European stockpiles since Russia’s 2022 invasion, with the U.S. providing about 600 of the interceptors during the Biden administration, said Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel who is now senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.

But the greatest expenditure has been during the Iran conflict, which has used up 65% of U.S. Patriots, amounting to roughly 1,500 of the nation’s 2,330 interceptors, CSIS says. About 600 missiles, including those destined for Europe, should be made this year, with a production goal of 2,000 Patriot missiles a year set for 2030, Cancian said.

NATO says Europe’s first Patriot missile production facility is expected to open in Germany in September, with deliveries possibly beginning early next year. The first deliveries should go to countries that have already placed orders, including Germany, the Netherlands, Romania and Spain, the U.S. defense official said.

But for now, that means some countries, such as Germany, have bought expensive Patriot systems but are in the “ridiculous” position of not having any ammunition to fire from them, said Arnold of the London think tank.

Germany’s defense ministry said it does not comment on stockpiles.

Russia also has limitations

Moscow likely cannot carry out a sustained air assault on a NATO target while it launches almost nightly attacks on Ukraine, Arnold said.

Ukraine’s recent strikes into Russia also have exposed weaknesses in Russia’s air defenses, which could prompt Putin to think twice about provoking a retaliatory attack.

“The uncomfortable truth is possibly the best air defense that we have is Russian constraints,” Arnold said.

Burrows and Finley write for the Associated Press. Burrows reported from London. AP writer Konstantin Toropin contributed to this report.

Though ostensibly aimed at giving diplomacy another shot at ending the conflict with Iran, the Trump administration’s pause in attacking the Islamic Republic reportedly comes as concerns linger over the supply of munitions, especially air defense interceptors. It is a notion that the president again dismissed on Monday; however, the lack of sufficient magazine depth is an issue that TWZ has raised frequently for years, and especially in regard to America’s air and missile defenses, in particular. In fact, we laid out in detail these exact concerns and how they would be a major issue in war with Iran just prior to the conflict starting in a feature you can read in full here. Meanwhile, amid the lull in fighting between the U.S. and Iran, Saudi Arabia and Jordan say they are still being attacked.

The U.S. and Iran stopped firing at each other late last week, leading to a pause after 13 straight days of continuous tit-for-tat operations. There hasn’t been a U.S. strike on Iranian territory since last Thursday. On Monday, President Donald Trump claims the U.S. has sufficient weapons stockpiles.

“…we have a lot,” Trump proclaimed to reporters aboard Air Force One when asked if he is concerned about a shortage of high-end munitions like interceptors for Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems. “We have a lot of the mid-level stuff too. Maybe more than we could ever use, no matter what. But we have a lot. I’d like to have more, to be honest.”

After again blaming the Biden administration for giving away too many weapons to Ukraine, Trump said the U.S. is restocking.

“So we’re building it very rapidly,” he exclaimed. “Plants are being built. A lot of equipment’s being built. The Patriots, in particular, are being built. That system is going up. We have a lot. Every one of our contractors is building four to five plants right now, and we’re in very good shape. But for some of the more sophisticated stuff, we certainly like that part.”

Before Trump spoke, the Pentagon on Monday announced that it signed “two landmark seven-year framework agreements” with Lockheed Martin and L3Harris “to expand production capacity for key components of the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) interceptor and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) weapon system.”

“Under this agreement, L3Harris will accelerate the production of its advanced two-pulse solid rocket motor, Attitude Control Motors, and the Lethality Enhancer,” the Pentagon said in a media release. “The motors deliver the critical speed, extended range, and precise maneuverability the PAC-3 MSE needs to defeat advanced tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and enemy aircraft.”

Concurrently, “the THAAD interceptor propulsion agreement, signed by the DoW, L3Harris, and Lockheed Martin, will expand manufacturing of two critical components: the solid rocket boost motor that launches the interceptor and the highly responsive Liquid Divert and Attitude Control System (LDACS),” the Pentagon added. “The LDACS provides the vital in-flight maneuverability required to engage and neutralize ballistic missile threats both inside and outside Earth’s atmosphere.”

As we have noted in previous reporting, current production PAC-3 MSE “is around the baseline rate of 650 interceptors per year, with half the deliveries going to the United States and the rest to allies and partners,” CSIS postulated in a May report about the severity of the depletion of U.S. offensive and defensive weapons during the 39 days of Epic Fury. 

Under a contract with the Pentagon inked in January, Lockheed is committed to boosting Patriot annual production to 2,000.

Still, the supply of these weapons remains a major issue.

The Wall Street Journal on Sunday reported that questions about the supply of U.S. offensive and defensive weapons are a large factor in the Trump administration’s reasons for halting attacks on Iran.

“The U.S. military had been poised Friday to launch an intensive series of strikes against Iran, which could have lasted up to two weeks,” the Journal noted, citing officials.

But the operation was delayed “so diplomacy could proceed and as officials discussed the effect a major attack could have on the U.S.’s shrinking stocks of Patriot and other air defense interceptors,” the publication added. “The president could still order an attack, officials said, noting that the situation remains fluid.”

The White House “has been informed of the declining inventories of air defense interceptors by Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,” the publication continued. “The issue is a concern for Caine, who believes that the low inventories wouldn’t preclude a resumption of major combat operations against Iran, but would add to the risk.”

Several officials said Adm. Brad Cooper, who leads U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), “believes the U.S. can cope with the limited stocks of Patriot and other air defense interceptors because stepped-up U.S. strikes, if they are approved by Trump, would blunt Iran’s ability to launch large numbers of missiles.”

We reached out to CENTCOM for comment.

Questions about American stocks of high-end weapons also extend to Europe and Asia.

“U.S. officials now worry that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and Xi Jinping of China could be factoring the shortages into calculations of their next moves, in Ukraine and Europe for Mr. Putin and perhaps against Taiwan for Mr. Xi,” The New York Times posited on Sunday.

Trump also claimed that the Iranians are eager to reach a peace accord.

Iranian leaders requested a meeting and “the only reason they want to meet is because we’ve been hitting them very hard,” Trump told reporters.

Asked how much patience he has for negotiations, he said: “I have a lot of patience.”

“We’ll see what happens,” the president added. “I think there is a good chance that something could happen. If it doesn’t, we go back to doing what we were doing two days ago.”

Officials in Tehran scoffed at Trump’s assertion, saying there are no direct negotiations taking place.

The American leader also dismissed an assertion by Ukrainian President Volodymy Zelensky that Russia was providing Iran with satellite imagery used to help Iran strike U.S. an allied targets in the Middle East.

“We’ll find out if that’s true,” Trump told reporters. “I’ll ask Putin about it. It hasn’t had much impact, because we knocked the hell out of them.”

Lockheed Martin has unveiled the PAC-3 Adapted Capability Effector (ACE), a lower-cost interceptor for the Patriot surface-to-air missile system. By leveraging the existing PAC-3 fire-control architecture and Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS), the company says the new interceptor will cost less than half as much as the in-production PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) while providing a high-volume option for defeating aircraft, cruise missiles, and shorter-range ballistic missile threats. Based on the ballpark figure provided by Lockheed Martin, a single PAC-3 ACE missile would cost around $2.5 million, compared to roughly $5 million for the PAC-3 MSE. The announcement comes as Patriot missile stocks are under immense pressure globally and after the U.S. Army made its hunt for lower cost interceptors official.

“American and allied warfighters need a solution that is battle-tested and budget-smart, and PAC-3 ACE delivers exactly that by building on the unrivaled performance of the PAC-3 MSE,” said Tim Cahill, president, Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control. “As we look to partner with our allies, we can further enhance resiliency and ensure our forces can swiftly counter emerging threats today and tomorrow.”

Lockheed Martin said the PAC-3 ACE is designed to provide allied forces with a “rapidly fielded complement to existing Patriot interceptors.” The company plans to work with U.S. and European industrial partners on development and production, with the goal of expanding manufacturing capacity and strengthening the resilience of the transatlantic defense industrial base. The idea of the new missile as a complementary effector is especially noteworthy, indicating that the PAC-3 MSE would be reserved for the most challenging or high-risk threats, while the PAC-3 ACE can be used for everything else.

Other than the price point, it’s unclear to what degree the PAC-3 ACE missile differs from the PAC-3 MSE. A rendering released by Lockheed Martin — seen at the top of this story — appears to show a shorter, more compact interceptor. Coupled with the substantially lower cost, the new missile will offer a more degraded capability set than the MSE. This could include shorter range, lower ceiling, and a reduced ability to engage the most advanced threats Patriot batteries face. Notably missing in the rendering is the PAC-3 MSE Attitude Control Section — the ring of tiny rocket motors that wraps around its forward section — that gives it enhanced agility. Sacrificing exactly this kind of feature could lower costs in exchange for capability. In addition, the new missile may not feature the PAC-3 MSE’s “Lethality Enhancer” warhead, for instance, and could just provide a strictly hit-to-kill capability or some other warhead solution to save on cost. Using a less advanced seeker is also highly probable. We have reached out to the company for additional details.

It is notable, however, that the ability to engage short-range ballistic missiles, at least to a degree, is inherited from the PAC-3 MSE.

PAC-3 Missile: How The System Works

Patriot’s ability to engage short-range ballistic missiles in their terminal phase has never been more important, particularly in light of the ongoing conflict with Iran, the war in Ukraine, and the continuing spread of those weapons worldwide. A lower-cost interceptor that can perform that mission for at least some threat profiles would help make missile defense more sustainable in future conflicts.

Overall, the concept behind the PAC-3 ACE suggests that Lockheed Martin is looking to offer a missile that’s closer to the PAC-3 Cost Reduction Initiative (CRI), which is no longer in production.

We do know that the PAC-3 ACE will leverage existing Patriot weapon system hardware, including the PAC-3 fire-control system and the IBCS. These measures should ensure that the process of developing, testing, and deploying the new missile can be accelerated considerably. Essentially, PAC-3 ACE will provide existing PAC-3 operators with a new common interceptor that can slot straight into the air defense system.

Northrop Grumman Integrated Air Missile Defense Battle Command System (IBCS) Flight Test

Northrop Grumman’s IBCS was designed from the start with a modular, open-systems approach to make it easier to integrate new systems and functionality as time goes on. You can read more about IBCS in detail in this past TWZ feature.

Having access to a significantly cheaper alternative to the PAC-3 MSE effector, while maintaining many of its capabilities in terms of the kinds of threats it can target, is a big deal.

A cheaper effector means the cost-per-kill against man target types can be significantly lower. It also helps increase magazine depth, with operators able to buy larger stocks of missiles, addressing a problem that has been encountered in war zones, in particular Ukraine, where Patriot effectors have been expended at such a rate that the supplies have gotten close to being totally exhausted. Recent operations have reinforced the importance of maintaining sufficient inventories of interceptors and other high-demand munitions to meet both operational and strategic requirements — for example, a future high-intensity conflict against China. Under a contract with the Pentagon inked in January, Lockheed is already committed to boosting annual production of the PAC-3 MSE to 2,000, an increase from roughly 600.

When it comes to the cost of the PAC-3 MSE, each interceptor comes with a price tag of approximately $5.3 million, according to the Army’s latest proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year. In the past, a single missile cost around $4 million.

Just as critical as cost is speed and scalability of production. PAC-3 ACE has been adapted with this in mind, and drawing upon production facilities outside the United States will also help. Having plentiful supplies of Patriot missiles will only become more critical once they are introduced by the U.S. Navy as well as the Army. The Navy is now working to integrate PAC-3 MSE into the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS), adding a valuable new anti-air interceptor to its sea-based arsenal, but also further increasing demand that the PAC-3 ACE could help meet.

Back in May, TWZ reported on how the U.S. Army’s Low Cost Interceptor (LCI) initiative was looking for proposals for a new effector for the Patriot with a unit cost under $1 million. This amounts to about a fifth of the price of a single PAC-3 MSE missile.

As we described at the time:

As a supplement to existing interceptors, a lower-cost alternative would improve Patriot’s cost-per-intercept ratio, especially against lower-tier threats like drones and cruise missiles. The design could also be easier to produce at scale, helping address increasingly worrisome strains on stockpiles and supply chains. These are issues TWZ has been calling attention to for years now, and that have been magnified by Patriot’s heavy use during the latest conflict with Iran.

Like the PAC-3 ACE, the U.S. Army said it was looking for a missile that can be integrated into existing M903 trailer-based launchers and leverage the service’s IBCS network. The M903 is already capable of accommodating newer PAC-3 series interceptors, including the MSE variant, as well as older PAC-2 types that remain in use.

As we noted at the time, the goal of acquiring an anti-air interceptor capable of engaging everything from lower-tier air-breathing threats to SRBMs, at no more than $1 million per missile, is ambitious.

The LCI initiative is also consistent with broader Pentagon efforts to expand access to lower-cost munitions through open-architecture designs and by leveraging new, non-traditional industry partners. LCI calls for Army ownership of the intellectual property, reducing vendor lock-in and enabling future competitions for complete rounds and key subcomponents.

The Army has already stated that the LCI missile and missile subsystem competition is intended to result in multiple awards that can lead to multiple different yet affordable missile interceptor solutions. PAC-3 ACE could be part of that equation for the U.S. Army if the higher price point is deemed acceptable, but clearly the concept will have considerable value for any of the more than a dozen Patriot operators, especially those facing the reality of limited magazine depth in conflict situations. Having a lower-cost effector available could also open the PAC-3 up to additional markets, too.

Even if PAC-3 ACE falls short of the Army’s ambitious sub-$1 million interceptor target, it underscores a reality that has become impossible to ignore. The era of relying exclusively on premium, very high-cost interceptors is giving way to a more layered approach, where lower-cost missiles can absorb a significant share of engagements against cruise missiles, drones, and other less demanding targets. If Lockheed Martin can deliver on its roughly half-price Patriot missile offering while still providing highly relevant capabilities, PAC-3 ACE could become an important addition to the growing effort to make high-end air defense more sustainable in prolonged conflicts.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

X-Bow Systems, a company that made its name making solid rocket motors and small space-launch vehicles, has unveiled a new low-cost drone interceptor, named Buckler. The interceptor promises high-speed and a unit cost of less than $100,000, a price point that has only been approached by drone-like systems, not modern supersonic missiles.

The Buckler — named after a small shield of the Medieval and Renaissance eras — is designed to defeat Group 3 drones. As we have explained before, under the U.S. military categorization system, Group 3 is a very broad middle tier of drones that covers designs that weigh anywhere from 56 to 1,320 pounds and can fly at up to 18,000 feet, at speeds of 250 knots or less.

Iran’s now-infamous Shahed-136 long-range one-way attack drone, variants and derivatives of which are now in service in Russia and with several Iranian-backed proxies, falls into the Group 3 category.

While optimized for bringing down drones, the Buckler can also engage other aerial threats, including subsonic cruise missiles, under certain conditions. This is especially relevant as newer Shahed-derived designs, and many other long-range one-way attack munitions, increasingly blur the line between drones and low-end cruise missiles through the adoption of jet propulsion and higher-altitude flight profiles. Then there is the emerging group of low-cost cruise missiles being adopted in the United States and potential adversaries, as well as existing, more advanced types. Low-flying aircraft and helicopters would also likely be on the menu for this missile, even as a secondary capability.

The high speed of the missile also means that a single Buckler battery can engage targets more rapidly and respond faster over a given range. It also makes it possible for follow-up shots to be taken if an effector misses within a given timeframe.

The Buckler is one of the growing number of responses to the increasing threat of drone-and-missile barrages, which are exposing the limits of legacy air defense models. In conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine, most notably, costly surface-to-air missile effectors are routinely expended, in significant quantities, against far cheaper incoming threats.

For years now, TWZ has been calling attention to the U.S. military’s concerning short-range air defense (SHORAD) gap, especially as drone threats have continued to expand and evolve.

“This is our answer to the call from the U.S. and its allies: affordable capability at scale,” X-Bow Systems’ CEO Jason Hundley told Axios.

“You can’t win a war of attrition trading million-dollar interceptors against thousand-dollar threats,” Hundley added.

The company is relying upon its own solid-rocket motor and propellant, allied with an airframe that’s also made in-house, which it says will bring down costs.

X-Bow Systems recently notched a successful flight test for the Buckler, the company says, demonstrating its propulsion system and flight characteristics after completing motor static-fire and igniter testing.

According to Axios, the Pentagon has also requested a briefing on the interceptor.

X-Bow is entering one of the fastest-growing segments of the defense industry. The company is already well established as a producer of solid rocket motors and, last year, secured a $105 million investment from Lockheed Martin to expand production and provide propulsion systems and related services.

The startup will now be hoping that the Buckler’s eye-catching price point of less than $100,000 per copy will set it apart among drone interceptors.

By way of comparison, the combat-proven Raytheon Coyote, in its Block 2 configuration, also primarily intended for the counter-drone mission, has a unit price of around $100,000, based on past reports. AeroVironment’s Freedom Eagle-1 (FE-1), which the U.S. Army picked last year to provide an additional layer of defense against longer-range one-way attack drones and other similarly sized uncrewed aerial systems (UAS), has a target unit cost of between $150,000 and $200,000. These are also notably slower and less responsive systems than the Buckler.

Freedom Eagle (FE-1) Next Gen C-UAS Missile

Toward the higher end of the scale, the cost of a Stinger short-range surface-to-air missile has historically been put at between $100,000 and $120,000, but reports in recent years have said that current-generation versions, including ones optimized for use against drones, can run up to $400,000.

In terms of more exquisite SHORAD solutions, the U.S. Army’s Enduring Shield is presently configured to fire AIM-9X Sidewinders, each of which has a price tag around $500,000. 

As for the kinds of threats that these effectors are intended to destroy, Shahed-type drones are typically understood to have a unit cost range measured in tens of thousands of dollars.

The Buckler is also intended to bring benefits in terms of speed and scalability of production. This should ensure that production facilities are able to ramp up quickly and, in response to demand, be able to increase the output accordingly. Applying the vertical integration approach, the company says it can address the “industrial-base bottleneck defense leaders cite as the top constraint on scaling interceptors.”

As demand for advanced missile propulsion accelerates, traditional production can’t keep up. Discover how X-Bow is delivering scalable, rapid solutions for urgent national security needs. #TechThisOut with @waltmac pic.twitter.com/nzSbikCz7X

— X-Bow Systems (@XBowSystems) May 7, 2026

Whether Buckler can deliver on its promised combination of performance, affordability, and production scale remains to be seen. But with militaries around the world urgently seeking cheaper ways to counter drones and cruise missiles that are appearing in greater numbers, X-Bow is entering the market at a particularly opportune moment.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

A novel kind of drone-based air defense system has been shown for the first time by German weapon manufacturer Diehl Defence. The Cobra 600, which has not previously been seen in public, combines a jet-powered drone platform with a missile rail armed with one of the company’s IRIS-T missiles, a weapon already used in short-range air defense systems and air-to-air applications. The new system immediately recalls recent Russian developments, which add short-range air defense missiles to its versions of the Shahed-136 long-range one-way attack drone, known locally as the Geran.

Cobra 600 is being presented at the ILA Berlin airshow, taking place this week in the German capital. The Cobra 600 is also known as the Airborne Launching and Attack System (AirLAS), and the program was launched last year.

The concept behind the Cobra 600 is that of a ‘missile taxi,’ in which the drone platform carries the IRIS-T missile over a considerable distance. All the while, the drone is meshed with a ground-based air defense system. Typically, this would be one of Diehl’s IRIS-T SLM or IRIS-T SLS systems. Of these, the IRIS-T SLS employs the same missile as the air-to-air variant — and therefore the same missile as the Cobra 600. The physical interface between the drone and the missile is a standard pylon as used on the Eurofighter jet.

As for the drone platform, this is provided by another German firm, the Polaris Raumflugzeuge aerospace start-up. It has a similar kind of efficient delta planform as the Shahed-136, with a modified flying-wing-like design. On the wingtips are mounted endplate vertical stabilizers. As displayed, the drone is powered by a pair of JetCat-P1000-PRO micro turbojet engines, each of which provides a maximum thrust of 20 pounds. However, the drone has intake ports for another two engines. It’s not clear if these are only intended to be fitted if heavier payloads are being carried, but it’s certainly a possibility. Concept artwork released by Polaris, as seen at the top of this story, shows a four-engine configuration, with the turbojets buried in the airframe and fed by much longer intakes, helping to shield them from detection.

Polaris Raumflugzeuge has already built a variety of drones in the same configuration, and the company eventually aims to scale this up to produce a spaceplane.

Drawing on its design heritage, the Cobra 600 drone has retractable wheeled tricycle landing gear, meaning that it can be reused in some scenarios. The drone therefore takes off and lands from runways, although it is also able to operate from suitable shorter airstrips, such as stretches of highway. It’s also intended to be cheap enough that commanders will also be willing to risk losing it in combat, or after it runs out of fuel.

The concept of operations has the Cobra 600 serving as an adjunct to a ground-based air defense system, extending its range considerably.

With the missile fitted, the Cobra 600 has a range of around 250 miles. This compares to around 25 miles for the ground-launched missile used in the IRIS-T SLM, or approximately eight miles for the missile used in the IRIS-T SLS.

As such, the Cobra 600 has the potential to turn the ground-based IRIS-T into something a little closer to a long-range surface-to-air missile, in terms of the distance it can cover. Of course, this is only true in terms of absolute range, with the speed and maneuverability of the drone being far inferior to a long-range missile. Unless the target is nearby, or the Cobra 600 has been pre-positioned based on known target vectors, the reaction time it offers is strictly limited. The missile itself is also able to tackle a more limited range of potential targets than a dedicated long-range surface-to-air missile, some of which offer an anti-ballistic missile capability, for example.

On the other hand, the Cobra 600 offers the distinct advantage of being able to loiter in a given area, waiting for threats to emerge, or to perform combat air patrols to screen certain sectors. It is best viewed as a forward-positioned additional launcher for the ground-based IRIS-T, and is also entirely reliant upon that system (or a similar one) for its effectiveness. At the same time, leveraging existing ground-based air defense systems as a force multiplier is a clear advantage. Another possible operational scenario would involve setting the Cobra 600s up as interceptors on a runway, sitting ready for launch on a runway to defend against lower-end threats.

In its current form, the Cobra 600 has no onboard sensors to detect targets other than the imaging infrared seeker head that’s integral to the standard IRIS-T missile.

In an operational scenario, a target for the Cobra 600 would be detected and identified by the ground-based air defense system to which it is ‘tethered.’ Connected via datalink, the ground-based system would vector the drone to the appropriate location. Using its own seeker, the IRIS-T would lock onto the target and be commanded to launch by the operator of the ground-based system. Of course, this presupposes that the datalink is not compromised by hostile interference or due to line-of-sight limitations, although SATCOM capability, like Starlink, would help keep redundant control over the drone beyond line-of-sight.

At this point, the mode of engagement is not dissimilar to the ground-based IRIS-T SLS, which features a lock-on-after-launch (LOAL) capability. This means it can fire missiles without first establishing the weapon’s lock on the target. After receiving target information in the form of three-dimensional coordinates, the missile uses inertial guidance during the initial stage of flight. Upon reaching the designated engagement altitude, its imaging infrared seeker activates and begins searching the predicted target area.

Diehl Experts | Ulrike Bartel | IRIS-T system | Diehl Defence

Another conceivable option would be to add some kind of sensor, such as an infrared camera, to the Cobra 600 drone platform, meaning that a ‘person in the loop’ could establish that the missile had locked onto the correct target.

A further option could be to ‘uncage’ the missile seeker and let it search across its field of view only when the Cobra 600 is in a designated ‘kill box,’ within which it would have authority to engage any target it acquires, reactively, and autonomously. Issues such as this clearly need to be addressed, based on combat requirements and ethical concerns.

As well as operating the Cobra 600 in conjunction with the IRIS-T SLM/SLS, it could also be integrated with other ground-based air defenses. According to Polaris, it could also be embedded with aircraft or in a maritime environment.

The Cobra 600 has already completed its first flight tests, with a dummy IRIS-T missile fitted. Currently, the development effort is mainly funded by the company, but there has also been investment from at least one interested nation.

With the IRIS-T SLM/SLS combat-proven in Ukraine, experiences from this conflict have almost certainly helped inform the development of the Cobra 600.

The war in Ukraine also provides an interesting parallel to the Cobra 600, in Russia’s missile-armed adaptations of its Shahed/Geran drones.

Russian developments have seen the fielding of these drones carrying either a single R-60 air-to-air missile, a much older and less capable equivalent to the IRIS-T, or man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS).

According to Ukrainian accounts, as well as the rail-mounted missile on the top, these drones are equipped with a camera and a radio-frequency modem.

Russian forces are mounting Igla MANPADS on Shahed drones to target Ukrainian helicopters that intercept them. The drones carry a camera and radio modem, and the missile is launched remotely by an operator in Russian territory. pic.twitter.com/T5TKPHyhVu

— WarTranslated (@wartranslated) January 4, 2026

However, the concept of operations for the missile-armed Russian drones is very different. While it gives the drones a means to engage Ukrainian fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, it works more as a deterrent than as a genuinely useful tactical application. As we have noted in the past, the difficulty in obtaining a high degree of situational awareness and the limited agility of the drone raises questions about the effectiveness of these solutions. On the other hand, Russia has been working on a man-in-the-loop (MITL) control capability for the Shahed/Geran, which could potentially be used to operate the missile.

Considerably larger than the Shahed-136 design, the Cobra 600 will provide a higher performance delta overall. It is also jet-powered, and, with up to four engines, this would give more impressive response times and maneuverability than the Russian system.

It should be noted that there are other previous precedents for arming drones with air-to-air missiles. In at least one instance from 2002, a U.S. Air Force MQ-1 Predator drone fired a Stinger heat-seeking anti-air missile at an Iraqi MiG-25 Foxbat fighter that was trying to shoot it down, which can be seen in the video below.

Dogfight between MQ-1 Predator drone and Mig-25 Foxbat.mp4

The fast pace of development of the Cobra 600 reflects a growing need for ground-based air defenses more generally, after decades of neglect. There is also a need for less-expensive, less-exquisite solutions in this area, something that the Cobra 600 also addresses, with a price point that is significantly lower than a long-range surface-to-air missile (although with the various disadvantages outlined above). At the same time, the Cobra 600 may well end up being used against even lower-cost drones, for which the IRIS-T is still a very expensive solution.

The Cobra 600 reflects a broader shift in air defense thinking driven by the lessons of recent conflicts, particularly in Ukraine and the Middle East, where persistent drone threats, as well as cruise missiles, have exposed the limitations of traditional ground-based air defense architectures.

By combining the endurance and flexibility of a drone with the proven, off-the-shelf IRIS-T interceptor, the Cobra 600 offers a potentially cost-effective way to extend defensive coverage over greater distances and to put ‘shooters’ into contested areas that crewed systems would not be able to venture. While some questions remain about how the Cobra 600 would be integrated with existing operational doctrine, the concept highlights the growing demand for innovative, layered, and resilient air defenses as militaries seek to counter increasingly varied and numerous aerial threats.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com