42 ms·

> future of warfare Color me skeptical. It feels like what we're seeing now is a local optimum: new systems (drones) designed to asymmetrically win ($) against

by ethbr1 3y ago

> future of warfare Color me skeptical. It feels like what we're seeing now is a local optimum: new systems (drones) designed to asymmetrically win ($) against legacy systems (mechanized vehicles) designed for very different goals. We'll see what things look like once the post-drone evolution cycle has turned on the armored side. That said, I do think the Marines are right, in that distributed agility/logistics from temporary and frequently relocated basing is going to be the new normal. Russia doesn't have particularly advanced long range fires and Ukrainian inventory is limited. But conflict against China or the US would be dominated by cruise or ballistic missile strikes against any concentrated, persistent target.

epolanski 3y ago
As always war is a rock paper scissor. As we have seen, the russians have been very good at electronic warfare and have increased their capabilities in fighting and jamming drones from sensible distance. This doesn't change what a mess "modern" war is when both sides have relatively good equipment and none can claim air superiority: symmetrical war of attrition.
threeseed 3y ago
Ukraine is constantly inventing new techniques that are re-thinking what drones can do. Recently they have been using them to drop spikes to slow vehicles which are then hit by a second set of drones. At some point soon these drones will have specialised capabilities and will go out in swarms to autonomously figure out how to take down objects.
- chasd00 3y ago
  Aren’t these drones regular cots drones with some modification? Wouldn’t taking the door off a microwave and pointing it at the drone cause it to fall to the ground? Surely it’s more complex than that and I’m missing something.
  - sandos 3y ago
    Obviously Russia is already doing massive amounts of radio interference, that has always been a problem, which Ukraine has partly overcome. Partly. Googling for it you can see that it is massively diminishing the usefulness of drones for Ukraine.
    - Log_out_ 3y ago
      Jammer hunting drones already exist. In fact that was the idea behind the Shaheed predecessors in the first place. Set a course, then home in on strong em devices.
  - stackedinserter 3y ago
    Frontline on both sides is saturated with electronic warfare system which are essentially microwaves with open doors. Both sides put them on trucks, armored vehicles, set up near trenches and even carry on their backpacks. There were absurd cases like this https://imgur.com/a/4LqgLED https://imgur.com/a/4LqgLED Drones evolve under this pressure. Dynamic frequency changes, computer vision, maneuvering (like "go up when lost signal") and many more counter measures are adopted on both sides.
    - mig39 3y ago
      Consumer drones already deal with a hostile RF environment well. Finding the frequency with the least interference, using a wide bandwidth for control, and a different one for video, and programmable signal-loss behaviour. Cities are hugely hostile to low power transmission, especially in the 2.4 and 5ghz frequencies. The effective range of cheap DJI "mini" drones in cities is measured in kilometres. If you get away from the city, you can double and triple your effective range.
      - Gud 3y ago
        We are not talking "interference", but an enemy actively looking for your signals and overpowering it with massive high powered RF. Flying your drone around in a city is not the same as flying it against an opponent skilled in electronic warfare.
solatic 3y ago
> We'll see what things look like once the post-drone evolution cycle has turned on the armored side I'm not convinced this is feasible in the short term; drone warfare is predicated on launching not just cheap drones but many of them. The new armor isn't steel or iron to survive the blast, but to shoot down attacking drones before they can explode. Most current defenses are ground-based missile batteries that can't really be directly protected by armor. Long-term, the most promising options are laser-based batteries, which today have insufficient power sources to stuff into mobile armored platforms.
- ethbr1 3y ago
  Shaped charge warheads begat reactive armor begat tandem charges begat active protection systems. I could see microwave-based APS (probably powered by a high energy consumable?) proliferating.
- njarboe 3y ago
  It's already being done. Check out these Russian improvised "Turtle Tanks"[1]. A big, light, metal canopy to keep drones from exploding next to the tank. [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDfkwlMaK7g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDfkwlMaK7g
  - FuriouslyAdrift 3y ago
    It's the evolution of the 'cope cage' that grew out of the shortage of active armor plates. Ukraine hunted that tank down and destroyed it by drone, btw.
- nerdponx 3y ago
  Is there ever a world (other than sci-fi) in which drones become a useful countermeasure against other drones?
  - pixl97 3y ago
    I mean it seems pretty likely that a smaller, lower range, kill drone could be developed that is designed for the express purpose of identifying other small flying objects and entangling them causing them to drop out of the sky. The harder part I see is friend/foe identification, rather than just attacking anything else that's small and flying slowly.
kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
They're using drones as killbots against individual infantrymen, actively chasing them down rather than taking a lucky grenade drop. That changes everything about force deployment on the ground.
- sandworm101 3y ago
  While this does create dramatic videos, it does not represent much of an actual change. Most of these small drone operate well within the range of traditional infantry-killing weapons such as mortar shells. The tactics have changed, but the idea of an infantry unit killing another infantry unit at a couple miles distance isn't a revolution.
  - nradov 3y ago
    The impact on logistics is at least somewhat revolutionary. Previously it probably took several cases of mortar shells to inflict one casualty. Now that can be done with a couple of drones. Much lighter.
    - sandworm101 3y ago
      Yes and no. Ammunition is important, but from a logistics standpoint it will be much less burdensome than the food/water/fuel that must be provided to men on the field. Even in a hot war, an infantry unit is not engaged in full combat 24/7. But it never stops eating.
      - ethbr1 3y ago
        But autonomy explicitly decreases the human logistics burden too, by multiplying the effectiveness of each human. Where in Civil War times you would need to clothe, feed, camp 100 people, now you have that firepower in a single soldier's weapon. And when you remove the need for even a single human, you also remove their logistics footprint.
        3y ago

by ethbr1 3y ago

epolanski 3y ago

As always war is a rock paper scissor. As we have seen, the russians have been very good at electronic warfare and have increased their capabilities in fighting and jamming drones from sensible distance. This doesn't change what a mess "modern" war is when both sides have relatively good equipment and none can claim air superiority: symmetrical war of attrition.

threeseed 3y ago

Ukraine is constantly inventing new techniques that are re-thinking what drones can do. Recently they have been using them to drop spikes to slow vehicles which are then hit by a second set of drones. At some point soon these drones will have specialised capabilities and will go out in swarms to autonomously figure out how to take down objects.

chasd00 3y ago
Aren’t these drones regular cots drones with some modification? Wouldn’t taking the door off a microwave and pointing it at the drone cause it to fall to the ground? Surely it’s more complex than that and I’m missing something.
- sandos 3y ago
  Obviously Russia is already doing massive amounts of radio interference, that has always been a problem, which Ukraine has partly overcome. Partly. Googling for it you can see that it is massively diminishing the usefulness of drones for Ukraine.
  - Log_out_ 3y ago
    Jammer hunting drones already exist. In fact that was the idea behind the Shaheed predecessors in the first place. Set a course, then home in on strong em devices.
- stackedinserter 3y ago
  Frontline on both sides is saturated with electronic warfare system which are essentially microwaves with open doors. Both sides put them on trucks, armored vehicles, set up near trenches and even carry on their backpacks. There were absurd cases like this https://imgur.com/a/4LqgLED https://imgur.com/a/4LqgLED Drones evolve under this pressure. Dynamic frequency changes, computer vision, maneuvering (like "go up when lost signal") and many more counter measures are adopted on both sides.
  - mig39 3y ago
    Consumer drones already deal with a hostile RF environment well. Finding the frequency with the least interference, using a wide bandwidth for control, and a different one for video, and programmable signal-loss behaviour. Cities are hugely hostile to low power transmission, especially in the 2.4 and 5ghz frequencies. The effective range of cheap DJI "mini" drones in cities is measured in kilometres. If you get away from the city, you can double and triple your effective range.
    - Gud 3y ago
      We are not talking "interference", but an enemy actively looking for your signals and overpowering it with massive high powered RF. Flying your drone around in a city is not the same as flying it against an opponent skilled in electronic warfare.

solatic 3y ago

> We'll see what things look like once the post-drone evolution cycle has turned on the armored side I'm not convinced this is feasible in the short term; drone warfare is predicated on launching not just cheap drones but many of them. The new armor isn't steel or iron to survive the blast, but to shoot down attacking drones before they can explode. Most current defenses are ground-based missile batteries that can't really be directly protected by armor. Long-term, the most promising options are laser-based batteries, which today have insufficient power sources to stuff into mobile armored platforms.

ethbr1 3y ago
Shaped charge warheads begat reactive armor begat tandem charges begat active protection systems. I could see microwave-based APS (probably powered by a high energy consumable?) proliferating.
njarboe 3y ago
It's already being done. Check out these Russian improvised "Turtle Tanks"[1]. A big, light, metal canopy to keep drones from exploding next to the tank. [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDfkwlMaK7g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDfkwlMaK7g
- FuriouslyAdrift 3y ago
  It's the evolution of the 'cope cage' that grew out of the shortage of active armor plates. Ukraine hunted that tank down and destroyed it by drone, btw.
nerdponx 3y ago
Is there ever a world (other than sci-fi) in which drones become a useful countermeasure against other drones?
- pixl97 3y ago
  I mean it seems pretty likely that a smaller, lower range, kill drone could be developed that is designed for the express purpose of identifying other small flying objects and entangling them causing them to drop out of the sky. The harder part I see is friend/foe identification, rather than just attacking anything else that's small and flying slowly.

kevin_thibedeau 3y ago

They're using drones as killbots against individual infantrymen, actively chasing them down rather than taking a lucky grenade drop. That changes everything about force deployment on the ground.

sandworm101 3y ago
While this does create dramatic videos, it does not represent much of an actual change. Most of these small drone operate well within the range of traditional infantry-killing weapons such as mortar shells. The tactics have changed, but the idea of an infantry unit killing another infantry unit at a couple miles distance isn't a revolution.
- nradov 3y ago
  The impact on logistics is at least somewhat revolutionary. Previously it probably took several cases of mortar shells to inflict one casualty. Now that can be done with a couple of drones. Much lighter.
  - sandworm101 3y ago
    Yes and no. Ammunition is important, but from a logistics standpoint it will be much less burdensome than the food/water/fuel that must be provided to men on the field. Even in a hot war, an infantry unit is not engaged in full combat 24/7. But it never stops eating.
    - ethbr1 3y ago
      But autonomy explicitly decreases the human logistics burden too, by multiplying the effectiveness of each human. Where in Civil War times you would need to clothe, feed, camp 100 people, now you have that firepower in a single soldier's weapon. And when you remove the need for even a single human, you also remove their logistics footprint.
      - 3y ago