deddog said:

---

92AG10 said:

---

deddog said:

---

jamey said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

jamey said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Not for taking out ballistic missiles but for drone defense it matters.

---

The APKWS does not appear to be for drone defense. Its just a cheap missile used against lightly armored targets

---

No here is a Houthi drone shot down with one of these missiles.

U.S. Fighter aircraft shoot down Iran-backed Houthi one-way-attack drones with AGR-20 FALCO Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) Laser Guided 2.75" Rockets.#HouthisAreTerrorists pic.twitter.com/bDoVnKwotc

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 19, 2025

https://www.twz.com/air/laser-guided-rockets-now-primary-anti-drone-weapon-for-usaf-jets-in-middle-east

---

So they took an air to surface use missile and are trying to use it against drones with multiple and scores of hits. Sounds very beta

---

They took an unguided rocket. And added guidance to it. It's an innovative solution.

---

APKWS isn't new technology.

---

Using them to kill drones, is pretty new, isn't it? But yes, hydra rockets have been along for a very long time. And the guided version, (mostly for ground targets) has been around too.

There's a video of an israeli F-16 taking out a Shahed drone, , using what i think was APKWS. Anyone know what i'm talking about?

[EDIT: You are correct, Wiki says it was tested against drones before COVID]. Damn, time flies.

---

I have seen these guys on Israeli airfields

both USAF and IAF aircraft

jamey said:

---

92AG10 said:

---

deddog said:

---

jamey said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

jamey said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Not for taking out ballistic missiles but for drone defense it matters.

---

The APKWS does not appear to be for drone defense. Its just a cheap missile used against lightly armored targets

---

No here is a Houthi drone shot down with one of these missiles.

U.S. Fighter aircraft shoot down Iran-backed Houthi one-way-attack drones with AGR-20 FALCO Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) Laser Guided 2.75" Rockets.#HouthisAreTerrorists pic.twitter.com/bDoVnKwotc

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 19, 2025

https://www.twz.com/air/laser-guided-rockets-now-primary-anti-drone-weapon-for-usaf-jets-in-middle-east

---

So they took an air to surface use missile and are trying to use it against drones with multiple and scores of hits. Sounds very beta

---

They took an unguided rocket. And added guidance to it. It's an innovative solution.

---

APKWS isn't new technology.

---

Yeah, it does not appear new, other than its being used air to air instead of air to surface.

I would think the requirement to have a plane in the area is limiting, unlike surface to air methods that are always on guard duty

---

They can be fired from the ground as well but that's much more limited in the area defended than a jet with dozens of them

Quote:

---

I would think the requirement to have a plane in the area is limiting, unlike surface to air methods that are always on guard duty

---

It takes 8 hours for a Shahed drone to travel from Iran to Israel so planes don't have to be loitering in the air waiting. They track them and send a jet to intercept when it gets close. Still a lot cheaper than firing a multi-million dollar intercept missile.

Gaeilge said:

---

China is going to have to self-insure the oil going through the Hormuz, which I don't think will be an issue for them. But marine traffic through the Hormuz will slow dramatically more until the war risk coverage is extended back to the area.

---

Yep. Transportation insurance isn't going to stop China from receiving 40% of their oil imports via Hormuz. China also has a navy very capable of escorting tankers ... something the US absolutely wouldn't want to see. So there's also that.

The risk is the wrong people get the guns and ammo. Take control of the border entries and hand deliver them to whoever Mossad sez are the right people may be the better plan.

benchmark said:

---

Gaeilge said:

---

China is going to have to self-insure the oil going through the Hormuz, which I don't think will be an issue for them. But marine traffic through the Hormuz will slow dramatically more until the war risk coverage is extended back to the area.

---

Yep. Transportation insurance isn't going to stop China from receiving 40% of their oil imports via Hormuz. China also has a navy very capable of escorting tankers ... something the US absolutely wouldn't want to see. So there's also that.

---

China will not move ships to the Persian Gulf with all of our units there.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/iran-says-will-hit-all-mideast-economic-hubs-if-us-israeli-attacks-persist/

Iran says it will hit all Middle East Exonomic hubs if attacks persist

nortex97 said:

---

Against slower/shahed style drones the Israeli's and others are also using Apache's I think. I haven't read that we have shipped those over though.

The “Tank Killer” has a new hobby: killing drones! In the ongoing conflict b/w the Gulf States and Iran, the AH-64 Apache is proving to be the ultimate Shahed-136 killer. While traditional fighter jets and SAMs often struggle against "low and slow" Iranian drones hiding beneath… pic.twitter.com/C0VeO0X3Q6

— Air Power (@RealAirPower1) March 3, 2026

---

They using air to air missiles to shoot down or hellfires?

MagnumLoad said:

---

FrozenInYesterday said:

---

Serious question. What is the negative side to flying C-130's/Bomber's over the country and randomly dropping crates of AK's and ammos indiscriminately across the nation in the hopes that some of them get into the hands of protestors that use them against IRGC. Have yet to understand why we don't do this. Would it encourage crime that could be seen as negative on the global stage? I honestly think this may be the most helpful thing we could do right now to help push our intended goals.

---

Agree, but it can't be randomly. Must be planned.

---

Agreed. I can provide my address for a drop please.

rgag12 said:

---

I don't know if you meant to do that typo, but either way it is extremely fitting

---

Nope. Auto correct lol

Supposedly the machine gun, but I'm not sure if they are using guided rockets as well.

Have we hit the nuclear sites yet? If not why not

The Fall Guy said:

---

Have we hit the nuclear sites yet? If not why not

---

Yes a few times. That's what the B2 and B1 flights were for.

🚨🚨 Confirmation of hits at Natanz.

The U.S. and Israel likely aim to prevent not only Iranian officials and vehicles from accessing the underground Natanz fuel enrichment facility they bombed in June, but prevent to access by anyone who may seek to enter if the regime… https://t.co/0VBciHwduE

— Andrea Stricker (@StrickerNonpro) March 2, 2026

Seems like more symbolic than real. Says it's unclear how many were there. May have been meeting elsewhere or virtual.

My take is that you don't drop weapons yet. There's still more degradation of the leadership and military stockpiles to do.

If the objective is just regime change, you only drop creates of weapons when it becomes clear its going to be a protracted battle that needs ground forces. This means you're playing to stop some other faction from gaining hold and you are losing.

If you're playing to install a friendly government and it looks like you're going to succeed, no need to drop weapons to the masses. That just makes more chaos.

This thread points to America and Israel being able to pound leadership until there is no one left and they can walk their made man back into Iran. Then the future leader can decide how it wants their people equipped.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/britain-sends-helicopters-with-counter-drone-tech-to-cyprus-deploys-naval-vessel/

Britain sends counter Drone helicopters and naval vessel to Cypress

Iran shut down all flights into and out of all Iran airports through 6 am tomorrow.....

I like the idea of delivering small arms via drones to specifically targeted resistance groups.

It would be REALLY great if we had developed some limited use (think 3d printed) handguns to drop instead of guns that will continue to operate indefinitely.

They have no internet I think

javajaws said:

---

I like the idea of delivering small arms via drones to specifically targeted resistance groups.

It would be REALLY great if we had developed some limited use (think 3d printed) handguns to drop instead of guns that will continue to operate indefinitely.

---

We did that in WW2 by manufacturing stamped metal pistols to drop to French resistance fighters but they were practically useless. You don't want to encourage people with no military experience to take on hardened killers with AK-47s with just a pea shooter.

bonfarr said:

---

Not for taking out ballistic missiles but for drone defense it matters.

---

It doesn't. APKWS Laser guided Hydra 70 rockets aren't for air defense, but cheap replacements for the hellfire that is used for armor or troop concentrations.

AgLA06 said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Not for taking out ballistic missiles but for drone defense it matters.

---

It doesn't. APKWS Laser guided Hydra 70 rockets aren't for air defense, but cheap replacements for the hellfire that is used for armor or troop concentrations.

---

Not true, go back and read what I and others posted earlier. There is video of a US jet taking out a drone with APKWS. This is now one of the primary anti-drone weapons we are using.

BQ_90 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Against slower/shahed style drones the Israeli's and others are also using Apache's I think. I haven't read that we have shipped those over though.

The “Tank Killer” has a new hobby: killing drones! In the ongoing conflict b/w the Gulf States and Iran, the AH-64 Apache is proving to be the ultimate Shahed-136 killer. While traditional fighter jets and SAMs often struggle against "low and slow" Iranian drones hiding beneath… pic.twitter.com/C0VeO0X3Q6

— Air Power (@RealAirPower1) March 3, 2026

---

They using air to air missiles to shoot down or hellfires?

---

They just completed testing of new 30mm proximity ammo (APEX) for this.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

My take is that you don't drop weapons yet. There's still more degradation of the leadership and military stockpiles to do.

If the objective is just regime change, you only drop creates of weapons when it becomes clear its going to be a protracted battle that needs ground forces. This means you're playing to stop some other faction from gaining hold and you are losing.

If you're playing to install a friendly government and it looks like you're going to succeed, no need to drop weapons to the masses. That just makes more chaos.

This thread points to America and Israel being able to pound leadership until there is no one left and they can walk their made man back into Iran. Then the future leader can decide how it wants their people equipped.

---

Along this same vein, how much of the IRGC needs to be degraded, too? I would think severely depleting their fighting capabilities would be a priority so any attempt at regime change doesn't devolve into a protracted civil war.

Read the thread

Ambassador Yechiel Leiter from Embassy Washington giving briefing on the war:

https://www.youtube.com/live/yhz5JRA7xeQ

Gaeilge said:

---

benchmark said:

---

Gaeilge said:

---

China is going to have to self-insure the oil going through the Hormuz, which I don't think will be an issue for them. But marine traffic through the Hormuz will slow dramatically more until the war risk coverage is extended back to the area.

---

Yep. Transportation insurance isn't going to stop China from receiving 40% of their oil imports via Hormuz. China also has a navy very capable of escorting tankers ... something the US absolutely wouldn't want to see. So there's also that.

---

China will not move ships to the Persian Gulf with all of our units there.

---

Indeed!

I would imagine there are multiple countries that would be interested in sending naval assets to the Strait of Hormuz to keep it open. Not sure why it wasn't a part of the plan from the start.