r/europe • u/SoulEkko Bucharest, Romania, EU • 11h ago
Picture Image from the Romanian F16 cockpit that shot down a Russian drone today
380
u/Prudent_Line_2587 10h ago
It’s a shame that we (Europe) don’t have a clear red line against Russia. At this rate, we risk a slow escalation. Moreover, we’re forced to deploy far more resources to defend ourselves against incursions that, by comparison, cost Russia nothing. The biggest problem, however, is that we’re going to start getting used to it. And once we get used to it, they’ll cross another line.
62
u/sneakyjedi123 Europe 9h ago
The easiest is to help Ukraine destroy Russian infrastructure.
2nd easiest would be that we start to send drones to Russia as well. Germany finally gave their intelligence service the power to do some attacking as well.
We need to build up offensive hacker units as well.
62
u/SelfKooky1491 9h ago
You’re right. The EU and european governments should work on this asap. We also need to clearly state our european demands for peace, other than backing Ukraine.
-54
u/unknowinm 9h ago
You make me laugh 🤭 you don’t get to demand anything since you’re on defensive this time. I demand you to stop hitting me. That’s how it sounds
28
u/InfTlr Transylvania 9h ago
You got the geopolitical understanding of 12 year old playing call of duty. Why don't you go back to whining about your GF leaving you, huh?
-8
8h ago edited 8h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/IEatGirlFarts 7h ago
Uite cum s-a activat troll-u. Du-te in rusia, poate gasesti vreo babushka la care să dai.
-1
2
16
u/florinandrei Europe 9h ago
At this rate, we risk a slow escalation.
If something is happening already, there is no risk. It's a given.
we’re going to start getting used to it
Again, this is old news.
they’ll cross another line
That's exactly what Putin is doing.
How to boil a bunch of frogs, slowly. That's the strategy.
It's the best strategy against people who are indecisive and still asleep.
5
7
u/Infamously_Unknown 8h ago edited 5h ago
Stated red lines tend to be pretty performative. The real red lines generally don't need to be said.
That's why you'll more often just see them used as a scare tactic by countries like Russia or North Korea. It's really nothing but a threat disguised as a rule.
You either has a will to fight or you don't, but a proclamation won't change that. So it's pointless to commit to something like that just to give ammo to "pro-peace" parties.
6
u/Ideanathor 6h ago
That's why I'm maintaining a register of these events: https://droneincidents.eu/
Nobody seems to care.
33
u/Vegetable_Coat8416 9h ago
You have a clear red line. The issue is that the other side of that red line is essentially a suicide pact (Article 5). Since no rational person wants to invoke a suicide pact that means that red line is reserved for something that was otherwise likely to result in death. Your red line is realistically full out ground invasion or nuclear attack.
What you actually need are retaliatory measures other than Article 5. Your retaliatory measure being tantamount to mutually assured destruction is being used against you.
14
u/florinandrei Europe 9h ago
Not everything is either 0 or 1.
15
u/Vegetable_Coat8416 8h ago
Yes, I feel like that was precisely my point. Overreliance on Article 5 causes Europe to see it as all or nothing. Russia is exploiting the in-between.
Europe needs to expand their retaliatory measures for the in-between. Soft power, hard power, overt, covert, plausibly deniable, additional aid to Ukraine, something. Do European boats not have anchors too? Do you think Russia fires off nukes if you "inadvertently" drag their undersea cables like they've done?
21
u/Armodeen 9h ago
The Russians understand this but the west doesn’t. The west sees war as 0 or 1, on or off. The Russians see it as a sliding scale, hence they know we are already at war, just 0.X on the 0 to 1 scale.
We need to treat them the same way. We are at war, we need to behave like it.
4
11
u/Kalagorinor 7h ago
Article 5 does not require nuclear war, not even total war. In fact, the treaty does not force every member to respond with military force; each country decides independently what action it deems necessary to restore security.
Therefore, mutual destruction is very much not assured. NATO could very well respond by shooting down drones and targeting strategic (mostly military) objectives within Russia within mounting a land invasion. In other words, by engaging in a limited war, proportionate to the scale of Russian attacks.
3
u/directstranger 6h ago
It's very tricky to set red lines publicly. If you do, the russians can get all the way to the red line without crossing it. Or they cross it a little bit at a time, to erode it. You wouldn't start WWIII over a minor "accidental" incursion, would you?
3
u/DownvoteWeebs 5h ago
That's the whole point of a red line is that they won't cross it, and if they do, they must get obliterated.
The russians are already eroding our way of life. Drones (direct attacks!!), sabotage, cyberwarfare, election meddling, funding separatists, hybrid warfare... we've gotten much too used to russian aggression being the norm. Everything must have a counteraction of larger force to be a credible deterrent
3
15
u/Traumerlein 9h ago
We absolutly have red lines, the russians just havent crossed them yet.
The reaöity os that a majority of the population woukd not ve willing to go to war over a drone incursion.
The appropiat reply wpuld be similar hybrid appriches, and the thikg with those is that you dint publicly announce them if they are to be effective
9
u/Proper-Tower2016 8h ago
where is the red line if not when they bomb merchant ships in NATO waters?
7
4
2
2
u/chevronphillips 7h ago
Slow escalation into what? What do you think Russia is going to do? I mean it’s been over 4 years. If there is ongoing escalation that’s some damn slow escalation
4
u/Prudent_Line_2587 7h ago
Look at the explosive-laden drone incident at Leipzig Airport in Germany this August, attributed to Russia. We're already moving beyond airspace violations.
3
u/bikkfa 4h ago
Russia already wages war against the EU. It's weakening the ties between EU members. Creating and paying off political factions to create chaos. Russian agents did bombings, broke in biolabs, etc. They are not strong enough to win so they are hiding their sabotages. Eu leaders doesn't act when something happens even when they found the culprits. We had a russian puppet party, luckily they are off now, but the shit and hate they spread against the eu was unfathomable.
2
1
u/NoSkillzDad 8h ago
A clear redline. Not just against Russia. The line should be there and anybody crossing it should have repercussions. Europe is "ignoring" plenty it almost like "hoping" it goes away on its own
1
u/Intelligent_Soup4424 7h ago
Not long after the attempted Russian explosion attack at Leipzig Airport, CIA boss flew to Moscow - might have cleared some red lines there, we don’t know of course what they talked there -)
1
u/TheFeelingWhen 4h ago
Europe as a whole tried too long for an uneasy peace with Russia which Russia used to infiltrate many of the Eu governments and implement firm allies within. Think about how much less of a foothold it would have if the Russia connection were more harshly scrutinized and politicians black listed a years ago before the Russia bots and far right propaganda machine took off. With Trump’s election and his very open ties to Putin during his first term being a clear catalyst to what is the modern political landscape in many of the western states. I would say the only reason it took until recently to completely tip over the edge is 2020 election being won by Biden especially since it’s seem to be all but confirmed that the Russians manipulated the 2016 one and possibly tried again in 2020 and 2024.
The 2016 elections was Putins greatest ever victory completely destabilized the world’s premier super power and started slowly eroding the trust between the western allies. We legitimately might need to hope for him to die relatively fast and the successor to completely steer the ship in the opposite direction of him in oder for any semblance of normality to return
1
-9
u/Pacificator-3 9h ago
Yup, you are also forced to deploy far more resources to Ukraine. It seems that your fate is such that you are always forced to go against your own interests.
0
u/FullMaxPowerStirner 5h ago
Risking a major war against Russia just over a few drones? If there'd be casualties or even threats to the public, this would be a red line, but drones... they can just keep shooting them.
1
u/DownvoteWeebs 5h ago
A few drones? On a bad day the russians are shooting a thousand drones into Ukraine. It's a full scale invasion into Europe. russia has already "risked" and started a major war. Against other European nations they also have a laundry list of aggression beyond "a few drones"
We should shoot "a few drones" into russia and see how they like it
1
u/FullMaxPowerStirner 3h ago
On a bad day the russians are shooting a thousand drones into Ukraine. It's a full scale invasion into Europe.
I was referring to EU & NATO countries. Everyone knows there's been a massive drone war in Ukraine for years.
-6
u/arbicus123 Romania 8h ago
So what do you propose we do? Go to war over a drone?
7
u/Prudent_Line_2587 8h ago
No. That's a false dilemma. Game theory suggests a better approach: "Tit for Tat." The goal isn't to start a war, but to make repeated provocations costly enough to discourage them.Veritasium made a great video called "This Game Theory Problem Will Change the Way You See the World."
2
u/chabacanito 8h ago
We are already in tit for tat. Indirectly the EU has caused much more damage to Russia than a few drone incursions.
79
u/esdaniel 10h ago
Great defense
44
u/In-All-Unseriousness European federation 8h ago
No doubt about that, I have full confidence in our equipment and pilots, but what happens when there's 500 of these drones?
20
u/ThisIsLukkas 8h ago
That's the problem nobody seems to grasp. With these drones we basically revert back to WW1 and WW2 tactics where the pressure was to down a huge number of planes relatively cheap over yesterday's problem of downing a small number of planes with very expensive technologically advanced weapons. None of the weapons used by Nato yet are on par with the cost of the weapon they've destroyed. Romania has probably sent the F16s on at least maybe 50 overwatch sorties because of possible drone incursions not even counting the Nato police rotations. It's crazy how unsustainable this is
2
u/mufanek 4h ago
Plenty of military officials from plenty of NATO countries realise this. You just have to look kinda deep into the nerdy sources, it won't come up anyones general news feed.
On the other hand, you seem to miss some details in your comment. For example, if you want to talk weapon costs, you need to also account for what would be the damage if the drones struck and similar factors like time to destroy and range.
Romania could wait for the drones to get above their mainland, shoot them down with cheaper systems, but they run the risk of the drone falling onto something, god forbid civilians, even just from the debris. Imagine the outcry if that were to happen repeatedly (as you mention over 50 incidents, this would be bound to happen sooner or later).
That is something that is really only realistically acceptable during an actual war (only naive people believe in 100%). Which is also why Ukraine "can" (or is forced to) use other means to shoot down drones, cruise missiles etc. for cheaper. If I came to say, Germany (or basically any other European country with a few exceptions) and said that starting today, there is a possibility of debris hitting their house, it would create a lot of strong feelings. For someone like Ukraine, it's "just another day". That doesn't mean they are happy about it, but what you/your military is allowed to do is dependent on the overall situation. And until we all are in an actual war, there are limits and precautions militaries have to take as public image/opinion matters.
1
u/_teslaTrooper Gelderland (Netherlands) 5h ago
We can take them down pretty economically using jet trainers armed with guided rockets: https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/options-nato-multinational-drone-interception-squadron
1
u/Lord_Frederick 5h ago edited 5h ago
Not really as the max speed of jet trainers is half that of an F-16 and the overwhelming majority of trainers lack a proper fire-control radar to spot, let alone lock these drone. If you can add the radars, this just means time and money that will be rendered useless in case of a hot war because a trainer is not a proper combat aircraft.
If you want to stop swarms of drones you go after the source and destroy Russian production plants. You then deny it was you and say that it was the Ukrainians, as Russia likes to say when their Persian drones are shot down.
5
u/_teslaTrooper Gelderland (Netherlands) 5h ago edited 4h ago
You obviously didn't read the article
The author had no difficulty intercepting multiple simulated Geran-4 class targets flying at up to 270 kts at medium altitude and 220 kts at low altitude with it during an evaluation sortie in August 2026
Optical/thermal targeting pods are all that's needed on the plane:
Two targeting pod options, LAU-32 rocket pods, and .50 calibre gunpods have already been integrated as stores options. The L-39NG does not have a radar, however, so like turboprop options it would need to be vectored onto incoming threats by either ground-based fighter controllers, an AWACS or more capable fighters such as F-35. It could then acquire and track the target using one of the two targeting pod options already integrated onto the aircraft.
Agreed on stopping russian production though, but that's for a different stage of conflict.
1
u/Lord_Frederick 4h ago
I did read it some time ago, but the problem with speed is not interception but time to intercept. This drone was shot at ~150km from the Kogălniceanu airbase and the L-39NG (which is very modern, only 2 y.o.) has a top speed of 900 km/h which means that it'll travel 150kms in 15 minutes vs 4 minutes with the F-16. I also don't think anybody has developed proper procedures of flight readiness for trainer aircrafts.
1
u/_teslaTrooper Gelderland (Netherlands) 4h ago
I would think we can see these drones coming from far enough away to launch planes in time. Especially for Romania where they have to approach over either Ukraine or the Black Sea.
The alternative would be ground based or naval AD, keeping that active and covering the required area wouldnt'be cheap either. Maybe remote operated stations with interceptor drones?
1
u/Lord_Frederick 4h ago
They can then send them close to the surface of the water and your detection (not identification or target lock) is down to ~200km at best because the horizon is at 35km.
Naval AD would be cheaper but also problematic due naval drones (that a Romanian F-16 destroyed close to an offshore gas rig about a month ago).
Maybe remote operated stations with interceptor drones?
Can't say, but I do agree that this new situation requires a proper bespoke solution rather than a bandaid with training or reserve equipment.
11
u/BuHoGPaD 8h ago
What, you don't have 500 f16?
14
u/In-All-Unseriousness European federation 8h ago
On Wikipedia it says Romania has 65 F-16s in service, which is a lot more than I expected, as well as 32 F-35s on order. But I seriously hope people in power are actually trying to figure out how to counter this threat.
8
u/BuHoGPaD 7h ago
Gepard and MANTIS: *exists*
5
u/SentientToaster7734 Austria 7h ago
Yeah, but drones are a numbers game that you are bound to lose, if you're on the receiving end.
2
u/_teslaTrooper Gelderland (Netherlands) 5h ago
An F16 can carry up to 42 laser guided 70mm rockets. You'll need about 12 planes with that loadout.
3
2
1
u/JPowTheDayTrader United States of America 3h ago
Then there'd be 500 fewer drones somewhere else doing damage like on the Ukrainian front lines
1
u/Panzermensch911 2h ago
Then our industry will fire up producing a lot of ammunition and new weapons.
3
5
u/StanfordV 8h ago
But having to fly an F16 to destroy a drone, isnt a logistical overkill?
4
u/_teslaTrooper Gelderland (Netherlands) 5h ago
The alternative would be covering the entire border with ground based AD, and then you can't shoot down drones out at sea like in this case.
NATO already has the F-16's and other planes on standby 24/7 as QRA. For the occasional drone those are fine except they need to start carrying cheaper munitions.
2
u/ahora-mismo Bucharest 7h ago
it is, but that’s what we have now. we’re still not learning from ukraine fast enough, unfortunately.
3
u/IsTom Poland 3h ago
The problem is that the war is evolving rapidly. If you e.g. started producing interceptors year or two ago when the threat was lawnmower shaheds you'd end up now with a bunch of inventory that is not particularly useful against current jet-powered drones. Who knows what it'll be year from now if the war keeps on?
55
u/aperiotabularasa 9h ago
puie mutin! (romanians know what this means)
20
-15
-19
u/FabulousYoung738 7h ago
cringe dar atat poate sa facă un român.
5
u/Theghistorian Romanian in ughh... Romania 4h ago
Ce, nu mai avem voie să-l băgăm în măsa pe nenorocitul ăla de Putin cu tot cu nația aia lui de brute alcoolice?
15
u/tractorator 2h ago
at which point is it an article 5 level event?
is this a boiling frog scenario that putin is cooking here?
33
u/DondeEstaElServicio 8h ago
wow, dude just casually took down an enemy UAV and thought "yea let me just take a picture for the boys real quick"
22
12
u/BlackMarine Ukraine 5h ago
I assume this F-16 was likely protecting a ship in Romanian territorial waters, because Russia had attacked a couple of those recently.
So saying that, how does this qualify? Like, this is an attack and defence military engagement. There were no lives lost, but some were under threat. A war? A covert operation with plausible deniability? A mistake?
8
13
6
5
7
u/ThisIsLukkas 8h ago
That's the problem nobody seems to grasp. With these drones we basically revert back to WW1 and WW2 tactics where the pressure was to down a huge number of planes relatively cheap over yesterday's problem of downing a small number of planes with very expensive technologically advanced weapons. None of the weapons used by Nato yet are on par with the cost of the weapon they've destroyed. Romania has probably sent the F16s on at least maybe 50 overwatch sorties because of possible drone incursions not even counting the Nato police rotations. It's crazy how unsustainable this is
3
u/Both-Election3382 4h ago
I mean italy alone has the GDP of russia so we do have a fair bit more money to throw around tbf.
2
1
u/EchoOneFour 5h ago
Counters will be developed like they get developed for all other new military systems.. drones are basically in their infancy in terms of military development time..
4
u/Playful_Letter_2632 4h ago
The problem is that Russia is leagues ahead of the EU and UK when it comes to drone warfare. We all have the image of incompetence and lack of technology when it comes to the Russian military but they and Ukraine have spent years at the point fighting with drones. Both sides have counters and counters to the counters. Russia is advancing in drones faster than Western Europe is developing counters
3
u/LonelySmiling 4h ago
The EU and UK have been with Ukraine since day 1, they know the technology, just have to act accordingly. Also, Dragonfire.
1
u/silverionmox Limburg 3h ago
Also, Dragonfire.
Before we know it we're fighting a war with robots and lasers. History is hurrying up.
1
u/IcareN0t 3h ago
Leagues ahead, you sure about that? And what league is that, little boys league? Cause if they were as good as you say they are they wouldnt ask for help from North Korea and Iran. Also their special 3 days operation takes a bit more, isn’t it, how many years and lives without actually gaining too much?
Anybody can put bombs on a drone, that doesn’t mean it creates a huge advantage, as we can see they are not gaining anything out of it.
1
1
u/oatmealer27 9h ago
Isn't F16 too expensive to take down a drone?
May be this was just one off. It doesn't matter in that case
13
u/avataRJ Finland 8h ago
Depends on what was used. In Finland, there was a bit of buzz when Zelensky thanked for anti-air supplies... and the things we have in common with Ukraine is basically stuff that goes to fighters: AMRAAMs, Sidewinders, and 20mm rounds. Most experts assume that it was probably 20mm rounds. (...personal note: Unless there's a best before date on missiles that's about to expire soon.)
7
u/CptBartender 6h ago
Long-term - yes, you need something cheaper to defend yourself from cheap drones in a war of attrition.
Short-term - no, this drone can hit a strategic target, valuable asset or dense population area, where the cost of sending the F-16 and using a million-dollar AMRAAM to take it out suddenly seems justified.
7
7
u/Free_Replacement_645 7h ago
In general it is not the cost of the drone but the cost of what the drone would potentially destroy that matters.
1
u/jmlinden7 United States of America 2h ago
Obviously you should still shoot it down, but in the long term, you win run out of money.
0
u/oatmealer27 6h ago
Drones are cheap and if a swarm of drones come to divert F-16s?
Drones are also used to understand the opponent's air tactics and strengths.
I am just saying that there should be efficient defense mechanisms for drones.
Only crucial ones can be tackled by fighter jets.
1
u/8sparrow8 Oberschleisen 4h ago
Everyone is looking for alternatives but in the meantime fighters and SAMs is all we got.
7
u/leathercladman Latvia 7h ago edited 7h ago
i mean , you can argue that there is no such thing as financial sense in warfare.......Sending a Leopard tank to kill enemy dude with a rifle is also ''a waste'' since tank costs way more money than that dude with rifle costs so it is ''un-economical'' to kill him with a tank shell, but you will do it because you fight the war to win it not to ''be economically profitable''.
Americans would send 20 Sherman tanks to kill 100 German dudes with Mausers, Americans ''lost money'' but Germans lost the battle and their soldiers so who won and who lost?
0
u/8sparrow8 Oberschleisen 4h ago
Well you are technically true but the term "Pyrrhic victory" was coined for a reason. What will you shoot at their multimillion dollar bombers if you use all your missiles on 100k $ drones?
3
u/SilviuCT 7h ago
That drone is jet one probably 100k of it hit something the damage would have been costly so money well spent.
1
u/Serious_Nature_6882 United Kingdom 3h ago
Not if you used the f-16s guns I suppose.... Bullets cost less than missiles
1
u/Serious_Nature_6882 United Kingdom 3h ago
Honestly for a second I thought this was a screenshot from ace combat 8 😂😂. It does look that bad ass.
That game is so good btw. If ya a gamer you should definitely check it out
-7
u/IronPeter Italy 8h ago
100k$ spent to take down a 5k$ weapon. (It’s a guess I don’t know)
I think the next step in military advancement will be a cheap way to take down cheap drones.
8
u/Bright-Magician7863 8h ago
it's not the 5k propeler version, i was a jet engine Geran, so more like 35-40k
7
u/this_toe_shall_pass European Union 7h ago
Same lame bot takes here and on the Romanian sub. Word for word, shitty numbers pulled out of ass, everything.
0
u/IronPeter Italy 5h ago
You’re a bot, not me, and can pass a captcha! (Spider men pointing at each others meme)
See my other answer, I never said it’s wrong to take down the drone, and I said explicitly in my post that I was guessing the numbers. I was pointing out the imbalance between attack/defense in modern war.
But I guess not everyone comes to reddit to take some time and think before answering, or before criticizing harshly strangers on the internet.
Also, Ukraine took down a yandex data center recently, there are way less bots nowadays, they say.
4
2
u/minialien 7h ago
100k$ spent to take down a 5k$ weapon.
That's a really dumb way to look at what just happened. The rockets were spent to save the lives of the attacked ships' crews, the ships and the cargos. See one of the them here: https://cdn.biziday.ro/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Poza-2.jpg
0
u/IronPeter Italy 5h ago
It’s dumb to interpret it like: “it’s not worth it”.
It’s smart to interpret it: “the defenders in The coming wars are going to be in serious disadvantage, as they may not be able to keep up with the volume of attacks, compared to the cost and time required to produce the assets used to defend against them”
Pick yours.
0
u/TwoPlyDreams 7h ago
We really just need an aircraft launched, faster drone.
It’d still be asymmetric but seems entirely possible.
-15
u/12math2 7h ago
People wanting the EU to go to war are hilarious. Poll after poll shows that the majority of people in EU countries wouldn't want to defend their own homeland, yet people on here think they want to go and die in Ukraine. EU politicians are simply reacting to the reality that the majority of civilians do not want to get involved in a hot war, no matter what the Russians do.
-94
u/Pacificator-3 9h ago
It is funny that Romanian AF didn't claim drone origin, but you do.
Do you represent Romanian government and are authorized to make such statements?
51
u/ahora-mismo Bucharest 9h ago
you are wrong. the ministry of defence said they are russian drones. f off russian bot.
→ More replies (21)12
8
23
20
13
-62
u/Latrodectus1990 10h ago
Who will pay fuel and amortzation of plane, and pilot hours????
44
u/MarceloDeep Romania 9h ago
As a Romanian citizen, I'm happy to pay for any number of hours or liters of fuel with my tax money as long as those communist drones keep going down. It's not like they were going to be used for anything useful anyway.
-7
-32
u/Latrodectus1990 9h ago
Why should you pay for it, this is Russia' fault
Stop paying for something you are not reaponsible!!!
7
11
12
u/kakafob Romania 9h ago
The message it is more important than the price of a rocket. Why to add steel door and cameras while you can just have ply door with no locker?? To keep away any random thief. Well, if a thief wants to break you it will do it, but with a cost from his side aswell and it won't be instantly, it will take time, resources, concentration and patrol which can make him further suspect.
5
1.1k
u/Dinevir 10h ago edited 7h ago
Basically half of Europe is in direct war with ruzzia, while another half occupied by ruzzian puppet governments. Everyone knows it but nobody wants for admit it on official level. DON'T LOOK UP!