US military uses one-way attack drones against Iran
CENTCOM says first combat use of LUCAS loitering munitions, cheap volume meets expensive air defence
Images
Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS) drones are positioned on the tarmac at a base in the U.S. Central Command operating area in November.
japantimes.co.jp
A solar farm in Nakai, Kanagawa Prefecture, in March 2016. Japan gets about a tenth of its electricity from solar panels despite having nearly no domestic production of photovoltaics (PVs).
japantimes.co.jp
Sonic the Hedgehog, Castlevania's Alucard and the weak yet lovable Slime from Dragon Quest are just some of Japan's iconic gaming franchises celebrating midlife anniversaries in 2026.
japantimes.co.jp
Yamagata co-hosts event on revitalizing rural economies
japantimes.co.jp
US Central Command said it used one-way “kamikaze” drones in strikes on Iran over the weekend, describing the deployment as the first time the US military has employed such systems in combat. In a post on X, CENTCOM’s “Task Force Scorpion Strike” said the drones were used during an operation it called “Operation Epic Fury,” and released an image of the Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS), according to The Japan Times.
The announcement matters less for the hardware than for what it signals about the economics of airpower. One-way attack drones are designed to be expendable: they trade survivability and reusability for low unit cost, shorter production cycles and the ability to be launched in volume. CENTCOM explicitly framed LUCAS as being “modeled after Iran’s Shahed drones,” a family of loitering munitions that has become a template for mass-produced strike systems across conflicts, including Russia’s war in Ukraine.
That shift changes the arithmetic for defenders. Air defences built around scarce, high-end interceptors can be forced into a losing exchange rate if they are tasked with shooting down large numbers of cheap incoming drones. Even when the drones are less accurate or carry smaller warheads, the attacker can still impose costs by saturating sensors, consuming interceptor stocks, and keeping bases and shipping lanes under persistent threat.
It also changes escalation management. A state that can strike with low-cost expendable systems can run more frequent operations with a smaller political footprint than manned aircraft sorties or cruise-missile strikes. The label “precision” often implies restraint; in practice, cheap volume can produce its own kind of precision by making repeated attempts affordable.
CENTCOM’s messaging leaned heavily on signalling: “American-made retribution,” it called the drones, tying the system directly to Iranian designs while using it against Iranian targets. That posture blurs the line between deterrence and imitation. If the world’s most capable military is adopting the same cost-driven logic as the systems it once treated as improvised or second-tier, it is an admission that industrial capacity and unit economics now shape battlefield advantage as much as platform sophistication.
The first public proof of that shift was not a new aircraft unveiling or a procurement plan, but a social-media post showing an expendable drone on a tarmac.