lol
Blockquote
The thing is, the drones will eventually have to leave, because they do not hold a charge forever. When they leave Russian troops could simply reoccupy the area.
Edro
The Russians have been trying.
They occupy.
They die.
New Russians come and occupy.
They die.
New Russians come and occupy.
They die.
New Russians come and occupy.
They die.
Rinse and repeat.
It is easier/faster to manufacture a drone and the explosive
payload once the factories are up and running than to make
new soldiers (even at the abysmal level of training given to
Russian soldiers)
1 Like
I didn’t say I agreed with the strategy the Russians chose to employ. But apparently the Russian leader ship is willing to accept casualties to hold ground. Yes, the drones come in and wipe out a number of Russian soldiers, but then they have to leave.
the drones by themselves, could never capture ground. The only possible way would be to use the drones to open opportunities, but then you need Ukrainian troops to go in and hold ground, before the Russians do.
The nature of attrition warfare is to wear down your opponent by accepting losses. In this case, the Russians have more men and material than Ukraine does.
If the Russian strategy is to continue, Ukraine is going to run out of people. Using drones to save people means sacrificing the ability to take and hold ground.
Edro
Not sure why your logic followed this flow. Drones don’t hold ground, cannot, and will not in the foreseeable (near) future. They need command and control, even autonomous drones. They have to be sent, and have to ability to autonomously act, or be directed. And there’s no single drone (not even the million+ reportedly deployed by the Russians in the last year) that successfully held/kept ground. Humans keep scrabbling back
It almost sounds as if you’re writing an elegy to peace, asking how long, how much, etc. The truth is HUMANS created warfare for various reasons, usually about control. Until such times as we all come to our senses, boots and bayonets, accompanied by drones, MBTs, rifles, and aircraft, seize and hold key terrain, and destroy enemy forces.
Warfare is about will. Drones can weaken an opponents will, but even the threat of nuclear weapons has not weakened the will to engage in broad conflict over small pieces of ground. Existentially, the Ukrainians continue to fight. IF they run out of drones, I suspect they will continue.
3 Likes
I don’t think it matters much if it is artillery, tanks, mortars, carpet bombing, drones, mass assults with huge losses (Russian style) or any combination of those that opens the opportunities.
A tank on its own does not hold ground, neither does an artillery piece or any other military hardware (an AI controlled gun turret with “unlimited” supply of power and ammo might work).
Any method used to open opportunities will eventually lead to soldiers on the ground..
The question then boils down to the most efficient method, cost can be a factor, used to
open those opportunities.
Do we get the most and best bang for the buck, or 10 million bucks, by buying tanks or
some other military hardware? Original investment plus operation, maintenance and
“consumables” such as ammo and fuel need to be factored in.
Ted, thank you for that excellent outline and explanation of the USSR’s system, how & why it was designed and function. Appreciate the info on how Russia adopted it as well.
A+++
2 Likes
Any system needs comamnd and control, depending on doctrine and training the soldiers
may be able to continue operating efficiently without command and control. Different armies
have different abilities.
The command and control requirement can be excluded from the comparison.
Systems or troops on the ground observe and control their nearest surroundings.
Systems located higher up have better oversight and can observe a larger area.
I still would like a definition of “holding ground”.
Is it simply denying the enemy access to the area?
Is it makiing use of the area, build a base, mine minerals, grow crops, build cities et.c?
Simple area denial can be done at least as efficiently with drones as with any other weapons system,as shown in Ukraine. Minefields work until they have been demined or expended themselves.
Elegy to peace: Peace would be nice but given that war seems to be part of the human psychology it seems unlikely we will get it anytime soon.
In the meantime: Si vis pacem, para bellum
Ukraine is using drones very efficiently. They fly them inside concrete buildings to destroy tanks hiding inside. They chase Russian drones high up in the air. They fly explosives into bunkers and shelters. They use them for surveillance, directing artillery and missile strikes. Surveillance after strikes to check if the target was eliminated or if it needs a second strike.
They take out assaulting troops, trucks, cars, motorcycles and tanks. They hunt artillery hiding in forests.
Drones are doing many of the things that boots on the ground can do. They can not talk with civilians, yet. There hasn’t been any need for it yet. Drones do deliver food and water to boots on the ground surrounded by enemies, they deliver instructions to enemies wanting to surrender.
The drone could be seen as an extended arm and eyes of the drone operators. Add a speaker and microphone and two-way communication and the drone can talk with boots on the ground.
Weakening the opponents will: OK. The huge losses in tanks has not weakened Russias will to continue. It seems they are willing to continue trying to take and hold ground without tanks.
Could they be thinking they can do it without tanks?
Ukaine has tanks but Russian drones, even if they are used badly, pose a threat to Ukraines tanks so Ukraine relies on drones to carry the “hurt” to Russian targets.
Ukraines production of drones is ramping up. They used to be a scarce resource but now they are used like hand grenades.
That has been and continues to be the “Russian Way” in warfare.
It works until the day it doesn’t.
The kamikaze drones don’t leave, they fly into targets and blow up until all drones
or all targets are gone. those drones are essentially hand grenades that can see
and chase their target. There are plenty of videos where Ukrainian drones are chasing
Russian or North Korean soldiers across fields. One drone even managed to trick on
DPRK soldier into shooting another DPRK comrade. The DPRK drone defense was to
fire their assault rifle at the drone. Drone pilot detects that the two DPRK soldiers have
become separated by 20 to 30 metres, buzzes around them and then flies in between
them when they are disoriented. DPRK soldier A fires at drone and hits DPRK soldier B
who is standing downrange from the drone.
Soldier B is down and drone goes after soldier A.
What does capture ground mean to you?
Drive away or kill all enemies so that friendly troops can marh in.
Deny the enemy the use of the area?
Drones can check every foxhole and drop grenades into foxholes containing enemies.
Drones carry night vision cameras and can hunt at night, they buzz around like mosquitoes
until they sting.
I will not make the mistake of proclaiming the death of the tank, too many “experts” have tried
that stunt before and failed.
The tank will continue to be one of the needed tools once we figure out how to defend it
against drones. Drone defense will be needed for all systems and soldiers.
The definition of holding ground is to occupy land. Any group or machine, which must leave the battlefield, can no longer occupy land. This leaves open the opportunity for the opposing force to occupy the same land. By the nature of their power source, drones must leave any land they capture. On the other hand, a tank does not have to leave. It can remain in position for days at a time. Of course tanks do you need refueling and re-supplying. But they do not have to leave the ground to do this.
There are many reasons to try and occupy land. When Ukraine invaded the Kursk region, the strategy was to split Russian forces. Force the Russians, to redirect manpower back into Russia, which relieves their forces in Ukraine. This did not work, because Ukrainian troops could not keep the ground. On the flipside, the Russians were able to capture large areas of Ukraine, which Ukraine is unable to re-capture.
Edro
Drones can hold ground just fine. You cycle them, just like you cycle soldiers. At any given moment, some are on duty, some are off duty, and some are transitioning.
If you want a drone to stay on station longer, you build it with a gas engine and a big fuel tank. The brain can be a fixed size with fixed characteristics. The body can be any size you want.
I would develop the brains and bodies independently. The brain has all the communication equipment, control software, and sensors. It is about as complicated as an X-box. You mass produce brains, driving down unit cost. Bodies attach to brains, accepting a fixed set of standard commands.
The way we do drones now is super dumb, super inefficient, and super expensive.
2 Likes
Russia has lost significant parts of the areas they managed to capture when Ukraine was basically unarmed and unable to resist. The little resistance they were able to muster was enough to halt the Russian advance despite the large number of tanks and other heavy hardware Russia brought
into Ukraine. Russia has lost thousands of tanks to Ukrainian drones and other systems like Javelin, Stugna-P and other AT-missiles, Bayraktar (big drone), HiMARS, artillery and mines.
The boots that Russia brought didn’t manage to hold ground, not their tanks either.
Many of those Russian boots are empty because drones blasted the feet out of them.
Soldiers need to sleep and other soldiers take over the watch.
Tanks need to go offline (crew needs some sleep) and other tanks take over.
Artillery crews need to sleep and other crews take over.
Helicopters and aircraft need to land occasionally and others relieve them on station.
Kamikaze drones are expended when they blow something or someone up and other drones
fly in to take their place.
Other, non kamikaze, drones need to rearm with new bombs and are relieved on station.
I still think that drones or sarms of drones can perform most if not all of the roles of a tank.
The tank needs to be re-thought taking the new threats into account. There is no point in spending money on a design which may become inefficient or obsolete before it reaches the users.
When the tank has been given a credible defense against the new threat environment it will
surely have a role on the battlefield, just like artillery, mortars and all the other hardware.
1 Like
Industrialisation has just begun …
Some drones are kamikaze style but so is an anti-tank missile.
Wasting a whole drone or anti-tank missile to take out a single tank …
Maybe the drone is cheaper and more efficient. Imagine a TOW missile
that can fly over a forest, find a tank, circle it to find a sweet spot to attack
while at the same time providing the operator with photo intelligence of the
battlefield, spotting other tanks, infantry and anything else.
In urban warfare tanks need infantry to protect against enemies running
out from buildings to fire RPG rounds or place satchel charges on top of the
tank. With drones the wide open fields have been turned into urban warfare
where enemies come buzzing in the air carrying RPG’s or dropping various
explosive or incendiary charges.
The various drones are lethal and will become cheaper and more intelligent.
The machine gun caused major changes, the tank cause major changes,
missiles have changed lots of things and drones are changing warfare.
Adapt and overcome or become a museum exhibit.
1 Like
Sure, you can cycle drones in and out of the battlefield. But they still have to leave the battlefield. Next, two cycle drones. You simply need a lot more of them if it takes a few drones to hold a piece of ground for one hour you need at least twice that amount if we assume it takes an hour for a drone to travel back, recharge, and return to the battlefield. Drones might be cheaper, but you still in incur a huge cost, and the drone could no more hold ground, then a helicopter
Edro
How long can a tank hold ground?
Until it runs out of ammunition? Runs out of fuel? Crew needs to rest?
Until it gets destroyed by some weapon or weapon system?
Until it gets blown up by a drone?
I would like a weapon system that can deliver “death and destruction” with
pinpoint precision to moving targets outside of visual range while providing
visual information, including thermal, to the operator.
Something that can be controlled with precision the last few metres and
be controlled to pick the most valuable target, able to be reassigned.
Easy and light to transport and reasonably cheap.
“Ukraine produces hundreds of thousands of drones monthly”
I presume it is the smaller types, handgrenades with wings.
While there are still areas of contested land, being fought in this war, there are areas of Ukraine, which is completely controlled by Russian forces, in which the Ukrainians have no hope to recapture at this point in time. This is the definition of taking and holding land, which I refer to. The Ukrainians have had their own smaller successes, at taking and holding land. Similarly, they’ve had their share of defeats. Compounded by a lack of manpower and money.
I would submit to you that perhaps Russia is not concerned with losing large numbers of tanks. One can argue that since Russia already owns these tanks, any expense was likely to get them running. Other than that, Russia had this huge stockpile of tanks which they could not sell and could expend in the war. Javelins cost a million bucks a pop and Ukraine can hardly afford them.
Yes, soldiers do need sleep. But they still hold ground even when they are sleeping. So long as they occupy ground, the opponent cannot occupy the same ground, unless they fight for it and win it.
As mentioned, Holding ground is occupying land. When you leave, the land is no longer occupied, and an opponent could enter and occupy it themselves, and without having to fight for it. Drones cannot do that. By their nature, they must leave. If there is nothing or no one there, to hold the land, anyone could come in and occupy it. Plain and simple.
Edro
1 Like
and Russian soldiers still keep running headlong into that unoccupied land and getting blown to bits.
Watch that video, among other things it contains a nice sequence of a tank holding ground by hiding in a building and getting blown up.
As you said before it is a war of attrition and Russia is burning through those “huge” stockpiles
of barely serviceable tanks, sending them to the front and Ukraines drones turn them into scrap
metal. Russia is unable to produce new tanks faster than they get chewed up in Ukraine.
Why are they dragging old T-55’s out of storage? Because they don’t have enough modern tanks
to cover their needs. They had a lot of tanks and now they don’t have a lot of tanks anymore.
They had a large and supposedly well trained army, now they are sending raw recruits who can barely tie their boots. The DPRK units may be better trained but they also struggle trying to defend themselves against that weapon system that sneaks up behind their back.
Ground loiter. The concept came up with the introduction of the Harrier to the USMC; instead of a WW2 flying “Cab Rank” waiting to be summoned by the FAC, as soon as there was enough room behind the beachhead the little jets would fly into a landing spot and wait there thus augmenting their endurance (not great and usually extended with auxiliary tanks - seldom dropped - which took up pylons/payload which could otherwise be used for ordnance). However, it quickly became clear this might bring them in range of other systems which could take them out while they squatted in the mud. In the Falklands the British swiftly deployed landing spots where Harriers (and SHARS) could drop in, refuel and rearm near the rear area locations which they needed to defend, permitting the two vital carriers to become eligible to join the Burma Star Association while meeting incoming threats as far west as possible or respond quickly to events on the ground.
Drones can be dispersed so they don’t make one big target that can be taken out by one small bang (the Pebble Island Raid), it’s also possible that part of the payload could be used for a “Drop Tank”, a small disposable battery pack which could be jettisoned after being exhausted on the outbound leg, and then the drone would lurk in a low-power mode until a target was acquired by other systems. Even a one-way “Kamikaze” drone could be programmed to Return To Base when it’s charge reached “Bingo” levels to be recharged and sent back.
Regards,
M
Ukrainian drone operators are already doing this.
Parking the drone near a road they know that Russian logistics is using,
waiting for a juicy target, maybe letting some motorcycles and cars drive by
and then jumping up to catch a truck or APC.
1 Like
They already are ..
That is why the Ukrainian operators try to launch their drones some distance away from where they are hiding. Don’t want the feature to give away their temporary base …
1 Like
So really it’s a Smart Mine but requiring human input for the really clever bits, but I suppose the Wet Ware could be replaced by a forward-based AI not on the drone but capable of controlling several…
Cheers,
M
1 Like