5 ms·

Other countries with rising weapons businesses are Ukraine and Iran. The best endorsement for a weapons manufacturer is winning a war against a tough opponent.

by Animats 4mo ago

jonnybgood 4mo ago
It’s just Russia using Iranian drones, but that was already happening. This war with Iran is not really an endorsement of Iranian weapons. The US didn’t stop its offensive because of Iranian weapons. We already knew the effectiveness of one way attack drones just from looking at their employment in Ukraine. The US counter-UAV industry might start seeing some exponential growth. There’s a lot of lessons learned for the US and we’ll probably start seeing a lot more money thrown around by the US military.
- Animats 4mo ago
  The Ukrainian counter-UAV industry is already seeing huge growth. The Gulf oil states attacked by Iran are buying.[1] Strong counter-UAV defense requires an entire integrated low-altitude air defense systems. The US systems the Gulf states have purchased are high-altitude oriented, useful against incoming aircraft and some missiles. They have long range radars, but not enough of them in the right places for finding low-flying drones. They have expensive missiles like the Patriot, which works against drones if there are not many of them. There are many incoming drones. Ukraine alone is up to 7 million drones a year. Aerial warfare is changing in a big way. It's starting to look as big as the transition from battleships. Big airfields are big, fat targets. [1] https://www.thedefensenews.com/UAE-Qatar-and-Kuwait-Seek-Thousands-of-Ukrainian-Interceptor-Drones-from-TAF-Industries/ https://www.thedefensenews.com/UAE-Qatar-and-Kuwait-Seek-Tho...
  - laughing_man 4mo ago
    Volume is the real threat from drones. Any competent air defense system can shoot down a drone, which is much, much easier to shoot down than a conventional cruise missile, which is in turn much easier to shoot down than a ballistic missile. But you can't task interceptors that cost $200k to shoot down drones that cost $20k for very long. Even if they all hit, and they won't, you'll quickly exhaust your magazines. In Ukraine both sides are choosing very carefully when and where to expend expensive interceptors, and I think as time goes by we're going to see a lot more passive defenses, i.e. sandbags and bunkers.
- graeme 4mo ago
  >The US didn’t stop its offensive because of Iranian weapons. I would say they did. Gulf countries ran out of missile and drone defenses and a lot of infrastructure was getting hit. Long run loss of capacity here would be worse than temporary strait closure and there were a lot of assets left to hit.
  - 0cf8612b2e1e 4mo ago
    There has already been significant infrastructure capacity destruction. Hard to get an inventory on exactly what, but even if there were an actual peace agreement with full strait traversal, it will be years to resume previous production numbers. Qatar lost LNG trains and facilities which are estimated at 3-5 years to replace. Just restoring shut in oil wells will take months. It is unlikely all wells will ever reach previous output levels.
    - graeme 4mo ago
      Yes that's correct, thank you, I see my comment implied otherwise. There had also been Iranian strikes on desalination plants and near the end strikes on Saudi Arabia's red sea assets. I believe these were very convincing.
- tokai 4mo ago
  Russia hasn't used Iranian drones for some years now. They got their own production running and have even shipped drones to Iran.
themafia 4mo ago
That's one of the problems with the lack of diplomacy in the US's position for the past 40 years. We have pushed the envelope beyond our own control: "The U.S. military reverse-engineered Iran’s Shahed-136 loitering munition to create a low-cost, one-way attack drone squadron in the Middle East called LUCAS (Low-Cost Unmanned Combat Attack System)." Necessity is the mother of invention. We spent billions in exchange for making our "enemies" stronger. We really are a ridiculous nation.
- tokai 4mo ago
  Shahed is already a copy of a German drone. I wonder how many copies of the same drone we are going to end up with.
energy123 4mo ago
The US, Russia and China all took turns losing wars to Afghanistan and Vietnam but nobody lines up to buy weapons from them because strategic victory (denying the enemy their war objectives) due to a lack of political will in the opponent or superior geography isn't the same thing as tactical victory due to better weapons.
- dredmorbius 4mo ago
  Afghanistan and Vietnam didn't beat their adversaries through advanced military technology, but by the shear capacity to absorb unholy amounts of damage and injury. Arguably Iran is in a similar position, though its Shahed drones and ballistic missiles did prove capable of reaching out and touching others within the theatre (1,000 -- 2,000 km range), and that these systems were resilient against attempts by its adversaries to destroy both stocks and launchers. Ukraine is the odd one out in that it has developed significant technological capabilities, largely with drones and anti-drone defences, and has active buyers for that tech.
  - epistasis 4mo ago
    Iran did supply Russia with Shaheds long before the current US attack on Iran, so they were at the fore front of drone technology (though if I recall correctly the design had evolved through time over adoption from other countries, perhaps originating in Germany?) Which makes the US refusal to interact with, learn from, or adopt Ukrainian tech all the more frustrating. There are 13 US fighters that would likely still be alive today, if the current US establishment was t so irrational in their hate of Ukraine, and had adopted anti drove tactics common in Ukraine, including the P1-SUN interceptors that could have taken out the shaheds. Losing an AWACS is an embarrassment beyond words, honestly. Best thing would not have been to start a stupid unwinnable war without any clear objectives.
    - energy123 4mo ago
      > Iran were at the forefront of drone technology. Only one-way attack drones which are the lowest tech type of drones. ISR drones are much higher on the tech tree, and Iran aren't in the FPV drone game due to a lack of need for them. That having been said, I couldn't agree more with your frustration around refusing to collaborate with and learn from Ukraine when it comes to Shaheds.
Danox 4mo ago
[dead]

Other countries with rising weapons businesses are Ukraine and Iran. The best endorsement for a weapons manufacturer is winning a war against a tough opponent.

by Animats 4mo ago

Other countries with rising weapons businesses are Ukraine and Iran. The best endorsement for a weapons manufacturer is winning a war against a tough opponent.

jonnybgood 4mo ago

It’s just Russia using Iranian drones, but that was already happening. This war with Iran is not really an endorsement of Iranian weapons. The US didn’t stop its offensive because of Iranian weapons. We already knew the effectiveness of one way attack drones just from looking at their employment in Ukraine. The US counter-UAV industry might start seeing some exponential growth. There’s a lot of lessons learned for the US and we’ll probably start seeing a lot more money thrown around by the US military.

Animats 4mo ago
The Ukrainian counter-UAV industry is already seeing huge growth. The Gulf oil states attacked by Iran are buying.[1] Strong counter-UAV defense requires an entire integrated low-altitude air defense systems. The US systems the Gulf states have purchased are high-altitude oriented, useful against incoming aircraft and some missiles. They have long range radars, but not enough of them in the right places for finding low-flying drones. They have expensive missiles like the Patriot, which works against drones if there are not many of them. There are many incoming drones. Ukraine alone is up to 7 million drones a year. Aerial warfare is changing in a big way. It's starting to look as big as the transition from battleships. Big airfields are big, fat targets. [1] https://www.thedefensenews.com/UAE-Qatar-and-Kuwait-Seek-Thousands-of-Ukrainian-Interceptor-Drones-from-TAF-Industries/ https://www.thedefensenews.com/UAE-Qatar-and-Kuwait-Seek-Tho...
- laughing_man 4mo ago
  Volume is the real threat from drones. Any competent air defense system can shoot down a drone, which is much, much easier to shoot down than a conventional cruise missile, which is in turn much easier to shoot down than a ballistic missile. But you can't task interceptors that cost $200k to shoot down drones that cost $20k for very long. Even if they all hit, and they won't, you'll quickly exhaust your magazines. In Ukraine both sides are choosing very carefully when and where to expend expensive interceptors, and I think as time goes by we're going to see a lot more passive defenses, i.e. sandbags and bunkers.
graeme 4mo ago
>The US didn’t stop its offensive because of Iranian weapons. I would say they did. Gulf countries ran out of missile and drone defenses and a lot of infrastructure was getting hit. Long run loss of capacity here would be worse than temporary strait closure and there were a lot of assets left to hit.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 4mo ago
  There has already been significant infrastructure capacity destruction. Hard to get an inventory on exactly what, but even if there were an actual peace agreement with full strait traversal, it will be years to resume previous production numbers. Qatar lost LNG trains and facilities which are estimated at 3-5 years to replace. Just restoring shut in oil wells will take months. It is unlikely all wells will ever reach previous output levels.
  - graeme 4mo ago
    Yes that's correct, thank you, I see my comment implied otherwise. There had also been Iranian strikes on desalination plants and near the end strikes on Saudi Arabia's red sea assets. I believe these were very convincing.
tokai 4mo ago
Russia hasn't used Iranian drones for some years now. They got their own production running and have even shipped drones to Iran.

themafia 4mo ago

That's one of the problems with the lack of diplomacy in the US's position for the past 40 years. We have pushed the envelope beyond our own control: "The U.S. military reverse-engineered Iran’s Shahed-136 loitering munition to create a low-cost, one-way attack drone squadron in the Middle East called LUCAS (Low-Cost Unmanned Combat Attack System)." Necessity is the mother of invention. We spent billions in exchange for making our "enemies" stronger. We really are a ridiculous nation.

tokai 4mo ago
Shahed is already a copy of a German drone. I wonder how many copies of the same drone we are going to end up with.

energy123 4mo ago

The US, Russia and China all took turns losing wars to Afghanistan and Vietnam but nobody lines up to buy weapons from them because strategic victory (denying the enemy their war objectives) due to a lack of political will in the opponent or superior geography isn't the same thing as tactical victory due to better weapons.

dredmorbius 4mo ago
Afghanistan and Vietnam didn't beat their adversaries through advanced military technology, but by the shear capacity to absorb unholy amounts of damage and injury. Arguably Iran is in a similar position, though its Shahed drones and ballistic missiles did prove capable of reaching out and touching others within the theatre (1,000 -- 2,000 km range), and that these systems were resilient against attempts by its adversaries to destroy both stocks and launchers. Ukraine is the odd one out in that it has developed significant technological capabilities, largely with drones and anti-drone defences, and has active buyers for that tech.
- epistasis 4mo ago
  Iran did supply Russia with Shaheds long before the current US attack on Iran, so they were at the fore front of drone technology (though if I recall correctly the design had evolved through time over adoption from other countries, perhaps originating in Germany?) Which makes the US refusal to interact with, learn from, or adopt Ukrainian tech all the more frustrating. There are 13 US fighters that would likely still be alive today, if the current US establishment was t so irrational in their hate of Ukraine, and had adopted anti drove tactics common in Ukraine, including the P1-SUN interceptors that could have taken out the shaheds. Losing an AWACS is an embarrassment beyond words, honestly. Best thing would not have been to start a stupid unwinnable war without any clear objectives.
  - energy123 4mo ago
    > Iran were at the forefront of drone technology. Only one-way attack drones which are the lowest tech type of drones. ISR drones are much higher on the tech tree, and Iran aren't in the FPV drone game due to a lack of need for them. That having been said, I couldn't agree more with your frustration around refusing to collaborate with and learn from Ukraine when it comes to Shaheds.

Danox 4mo ago

[dead]