U.S. Military Records 81 Aircraft Lost or Damaged in Iran War Including 45 MQ-9 Reaper Drones.

The United States now lists 81 fixed-wing aircraft, helicopters, and unmanned aircraft as lost or damaged during operations against Iran since February 28, according to an updated U.S. Congressional Research Service (CRS) assessment. The revised accounting includes 45 MQ-9 Reapers and 12 F-15E Strike Eagles, making those two aircraft types the largest components of a sharply expanded public tally of U.S. aviation attrition.

The CRS report, revised on October 5, 2026, nearly doubles the 42 aircraft listed in its May assessment. The increase should not be interpreted automatically as 39 additional aircraft hit since May, because the accounting has also evolved as more incidents, damage assessments, and attribution details entered the public record.

Related topic: Iran Conflict Accelerates Gulf States Shift Toward a More Integrated U.S. Air Defense Network

U.S. aircraft lost or damaged during operations against Iran since February 28, 2026, according to the updated U.S. Congressional Research Service assessment. The tally includes 45 MQ-9 Reapers, 12 F-15E Strike Eagles, and 7 KC-135 tankers, for a total of 81 aircraft. (Picture source: AI-assisted image and editing Army Recognition Group)

The 45 MQ-9 Reaper drones included in the CRS (Congressional Research Service) accounting are operationally significant because the Reaper is used extensively for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and precision-strike missions. The revised list also includes three MQ-1-series unmanned aircraft, further increasing the share of remotely piloted systems represented in the overall total.

For the U.S. Air Force, the MQ-9 figure raises questions about the sustainability of persistent surveillance in contested airspace. Reapers can provide long-duration sensor coverage and strike capacity without exposing an onboard aircrew, but repeated losses or damage can reduce the number of aircraft available for continuous ISR or force commanders to shift missions toward more survivable sensors and standoff systems.

Adding 12 F-15E Strike Eagles creates a different pressure point. The F-15E remains a major U.S. long-range strike aircraft, combining substantial weapons payload, combat radius, and precision-attack capability for conventional strike, close air support, and other demanding missions.

Any prolonged reduction in available F-15Es therefore affects the depth of a finite combat fleet and can strain aircraft assigned to other theaters. Unlike remotely piloted aircraft, losses or extended damage to Strike Eagles also affect trained aircrew capacity, maintenance demand, and the ability to regenerate high-end strike sorties.

Other aircraft identified in the updated accounting include an F-35A Lightning II, KC-135 Stratotankers, an E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control aircraft, A-10 Thunderbolt IIs, MC-130J Commando II special-operations aircraft and a Navy MQ-4C Triton unmanned surveillance aircraft, together with several helicopters.

The KC-135 and E-3 entries are particularly important because they represent force enablers rather than frontline strike aircraft. Tankers extend the effective reach and persistence of fighters and bombers, while the E-3 provides airborne surveillance, battle management and command-and-control functions needed to coordinate complex air operations.

Damage to these aircraft can therefore affect more than the individual airframe. Even temporary reductions in tanker or airborne early-warning availability can constrain sortie generation, shorten time on station or increase demand on other scarce support aircraft.

The CRS accounting also covers more than enemy shootdowns. Reported cases include combat losses, friendly-fire incidents, Iranian missile or unmanned-aircraft attacks against aircraft on the ground, crashes and aircraft deliberately destroyed by U.S. forces during operations.

That distinction is central to interpreting the 81-aircraft figure. CRS states that the tally remains subject to revision because of classification, continuing combat activity and uncertainty over attribution, while some aircraft currently listed as damaged may already have returned to service.

The financial impact requires similar caution. CRS cites a September Congressional Budget Office estimate that replacing U.S. equipment losses recorded through August 1 could cost between $1.9 billion and $3.3 billion depending on Pentagon replacement decisions, but that range applies to equipment losses overall and should not be attributed exclusively to the 81 aircraft.

Operationally, the revised assessment shows pressure emerging across several layers of U.S. airpower at once. MQ-9 and MQ-1-series attrition affects persistent ISR capacity, F-15E losses or damage place pressure on strike availability, and impacts involving KC-135s and the E-3 affect the supporting architecture required to sustain high-tempo combat operations.

The broader implication for the Pentagon is that aircraft attrition in a prolonged regional war cannot be measured only by permanent write-offs. Battle damage, runway and base attacks, maintenance requirements, friendly-fire incidents and temporary removals from service can all reduce combat availability even when an aircraft is ultimately repaired.

The revised CRS tally therefore points to a broader force-regeneration challenge: sustaining enough surveillance, strike, refueling, and command-and-control capacity while repairing damaged aircraft, replacing irrecoverable losses, and preserving sufficient readiness for other U.S. commitments worldwide.

Explore More Defense News

• Land Defense News
• Naval Defense News
• Defense Aerospace News

Written by Alain Servaes – Chief Editor, Army Recognition Group
Alain Servaes is a former infantry non-commissioned officer and the founder of Army Recognition. With over 20 years in defense journalism, he provides expert analysis on military equipment, NATO operations, and the global defense industry.