

NATO satellites can spot all of the fixed anti-aircraft sites, and keep tabs on various pre-prepared sites which are occupied regularly, but not permanently. One big advantage of cruise missiles is that they can steer around/between known AA sites, using their low altitude or reduced radar visibility to reduce the possible engagement range by the AA site.
Now, these permanent/semi-permanent sites aren’t rendered completely useless. As the drones/cruise missiles avoid the permanent AA sites, they’re funneling themselves between them into corridors where they can be preyed upon by roving aircraft, or often smaller, more mobile anti-aircraft units. Russia is actually one of the few countries on earth that still maintains a highly varied anti-air system inventory, and has the tools to even attempt this kind of defense.
Asymmetrically, it’s not too bad. Something like an R-73 missile is estimated to cost, on the lower end, about the same as an FP-1 long range drone. Combined with the fact that many drones are being taken down by 30mm ground fire, really, the jets just need to break even with the drones that are leaking through.






Do they feel safe enough to fly Poseidons without getting popped by some sneaky fucker in a jet trainer running circles below a coastal mountain? To actually control the airspace in force they’d need to launch a lot of assets to try and find Iranian submarines that will be chilling on the seabed, quietly.
“Mines” also wouldn’t leave a hole above the waterline - but it seems that crews have stopped reporting to anyone but their insurance companies - and if the insurance companies don’t care because they aren’t offering coverage, why take pictures at all?