Russia Plans to Mass-Produce 75,000 Guided Bombs by 2025

In a bold and alarming move, Russia has announced its plan to mass-produce 75,000 guided bombs by the end of 2025, marking a 50% increase from the 50,000 units produced in 2024.

This development, coming amidst the ongoing war in Ukraine, signals a significant shift in Moscow’s military strategy—one that prioritizes volume-based, cost-effective aerial bombardment over precision missile strikes.

The question remains: Can Ukraine withstand this escalating bombardment, or will Russian forces finally achieve their long-sought breakthrough on the battlefield?

Key Details of Russia’s Guided Bomb Production

The mass production effort will center around the integration of Unified Gliding and Correction Module (UMPK) kits, which enhance conventional unguided bombs with precision-guidance capabilities.

The primary bomb types in this expansion include the FAB-500, FAB-1500, and FAB-3000 models. When launched from high altitudes, these bombs can glide distances ranging from 40 to 70 kilometers, making them a formidable threat to Ukrainian defensive positions.

Crucially, these bombs are significantly more cost-effective than cruise missiles, with each UMPK-equipped FAB-500 estimated at $24,000—far cheaper than the price tag of precision-guided missiles.

This affordability, combined with the sheer volume of production, allows Russia to sustain a relentless barrage against Ukrainian forces without depleting its missile stockpiles.

Strategic Implications

If Russia successfully meets its ambitious production goal, the battlefield dynamics could undergo a significant transformation. The primary objective behind mass-producing 75,000 guided bombs appears to be overwhelming Ukrainian defenses through relentless and sustained bombardment.

By sheer volume alone, these weapons could make defensive positions increasingly untenable, forcing Ukrainian troops into a constant state of retreat and exhaustion. The psychological toll of persistent aerial assaults could degrade morale, making it significantly harder for Ukrainian forces to maintain strongholds along the front lines.

Moreover, this strategy introduces a new layer of asymmetrical warfare. Unlike Russia’s more expensive cruise missiles, these guided bombs offer a cost-effective means to sustain high-intensity attacks without depleting resources as rapidly.

By contrast, Ukraine’s air defense systems—already strained by shortages of interceptor missiles—would struggle to keep pace with the relentless waves of incoming munitions. If Russia can maintain this level of pressure, Ukraine may find itself unable to intercept or mitigate the threat effectively.

Beyond direct military consequences, the impact on Ukraine’s cities and infrastructure could be devastating. With an increased capacity to strike deep behind enemy lines, Russia may intensify its attacks on urban centers, key logistical hubs, and military installations.

This escalation would likely worsen the humanitarian crisis, displacing more civilians and making reconstruction efforts even more challenging. If major cities are subjected to sustained guided bomb campaigns, Ukraine’s ability to maintain vital wartime production and supply lines could be severely disrupted.

In the broader strategic picture, Russia’s overwhelming use of guided bombs may force Ukraine into making difficult decisions regarding territorial defense. If Ukrainian forces cannot adequately counter the increasing volume of strikes, they may be compelled to conduct tactical withdrawals from critical front-line positions.

Such a shift could allow Russia to secure territorial gains, particularly in contested regions where the war has been locked in a grinding stalemate. By leveraging mass production and cost efficiency, Russia may seek to tilt the balance of the war in its favor, making it harder for Ukraine to reclaim lost ground.

Challenges for Ukraine: A Defense Stretched Thin

For Ukraine, the prospect of Russia deploying 75,000 guided bombs presents an enormous challenge. One of the most pressing concerns is the strain on its already overstretched air defense systems.

Ukrainian forces have had some success in intercepting Russian missiles and drones, but the sheer volume of guided bombs—potentially 200 drops per day—could overwhelm even the most advanced systems.

Ammunition shortages exacerbate the situation. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has publicly acknowledged that in certain regions, air defense units are running dangerously low on interceptor missiles.

Some areas have reportedly “zero missiles” available, leaving them entirely vulnerable to Russian aerial attacks. Unlike drones, which can be countered with electronic warfare measures, guided bombs require kinetic interception, demanding a steady supply of surface-to-air missiles that Ukraine is struggling to maintain.

Additionally, Russia’s ability to launch these bombs from distances of 40 to 70 kilometers further complicates Ukraine’s defensive efforts. Many of Ukraine’s air defense systems were designed to counter shorter-range threats, making it difficult to engage bombs that glide toward their targets from long distances. This forces Ukraine to rely on longer-range missile interceptors, which are in short supply due to the ongoing intensity of the conflict.

Beyond military hardware, Ukraine’s ability to protect both the front lines and critical infrastructure is becoming increasingly strained. Russian forces have repeatedly targeted energy facilities, logistics hubs, and transportation networks, aiming to cripple Ukraine’s war effort. With limited resources, Ukrainian commanders must make difficult choices about where to allocate defenses, often leaving some cities and regions exposed.

International Response: A Race Against Time

In response to Russia’s escalation, Ukraine’s Western allies are scrambling to bolster its air defense capabilities. One of the most significant developments is the planned delivery of F-16 fighter jets, expected to arrive in Ukraine in 2025.

These aircraft, equipped with advanced air-to-air missiles and targeting systems, could help Ukraine intercept Russian bombers before they release their payloads. However, training Ukrainian pilots and integrating these jets into combat operations takes time—a luxury Ukraine may not have as the intensity of Russian attacks increases.

Another key component of the international response is the provision of long-range missile systems, such as the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS). These missiles could enable Ukraine to strike Russian air bases and disrupt bomb deployments before they reach the battlefield. However, logistical challenges and concerns about escalation have slowed the delivery and deployment of such weapons.

Meanwhile, Western nations are ramping up production of interceptor missiles to help Ukraine sustain its defenses. The United States and European allies have pledged to increase the manufacturing of Patriot and NASAMS missile systems, but scaling up production is a lengthy process. Even with accelerated efforts, there is a real risk that Ukraine’s air defenses will be unable to keep pace with the growing threat posed by Russia’s guided bombs.

Diplomatically, the escalation in Russia’s military production has prompted renewed discussions about additional sanctions and economic pressure. Western nations are exploring further restrictions on Russia’s defense sector, aiming to limit its ability to acquire critical components for guided bomb production.

However, Russia has demonstrated a remarkable ability to circumvent sanctions, often relying on black-market procurement and alternative supply chains through allied nations like China and Iran.

However, whether these measures will be sufficient to counter Russia’s escalating bombardment strategy remains an open question. With 2025 poised to see an intensified aerial assault, Ukraine’s survival will hinge on sustained Western support, strategic resource management, and rapid adaptation to the evolving nature of the war.