Russia's War Against Ukraine

[JudgeDredd]

...I'm curious to know what lessons NATO has learned there and whether/how it will affect their own drone procurement strategies.

I imagine the proliferation of massive amounts of point defence weapons will be one thing

[FarAway Sooner]

...I'm curious to know what lessons NATO has learned there and whether/how it will affect their own drone procurement strategies.

I imagine the proliferation of massive amounts of point defence weapons will be one thing

It'll be curious to see what sorts of point defense weapons emerge against what types of drones (e.g., flying how fast and how high?), and what happens to a given point defense weapon after it reveals its location by opening fire on a drone?  I also wonder whether we'll start to see a proliferation of slightly larger HK-drones armed with self-reloading shotguns or miniguns.

I assume that ECM will also work against drones, although I suspect that both sides are already using different types of ECM to different effect.  There must be a maddening cycle of measure and counter-measure evolving, as both sides just make the rules up as they go. 

Some ECM just jams a drone's ability to receive instructions--which might or might not yield the same result as a kinetic kill.  Other ECM confuses a drone's GPS, so it has no idea where it is and/or can't strike a target.  Other ECM simply blocks a drone's ability to broadcast signals back to a home base.

In the meantime, everybody is trying to figure out where each other's drones are getting their signals from.  Of course, it shouldn't be hard to rig an antenna that broadcasts from a long distance away from a command bunker, assuming both sides have time to build bunkers where a drone operator can hunker down.

And the kicker to it all:  The drones are probably all too small to destroy with the Jewish Space Laser.  And the collateral damage would be unacceptable in any event!

[Jarhead0331]

I'm in the ECM camp. I think drones will more often than not be targeted through electronic means. Point defense weaponry platforms would be too costly for targeting all but the largest drones and those are capable of flying at altitude.

With respect to direct attacks against smaller commercially available drones, outside of more traditional man portable kinetic arms, I think ultimately next gen weaponry will prove most viable, such as laser, sonic, etc.

[Sir Slash]

Could it be time to bring back Falconry? 

[Gusington]

^I think so 

[JasonPratt]

And the kicker to it all:  The drones are probably all too small to destroy with the Jewish Space Laser.  And the collateral damage would be unacceptable in any event!

In future news today, liberation revolutionaries have started launching their drones from the top of hospitals under their control...

[FarAway Sooner]

Interesting article about US steps to increase artillery shell production.  The article references a NATO analysis a few months ago suggesting that the Russians are producing 250,000 artillery shells/month.  The article repeatedly cites a 100,000 artillery shells/month target of the US, but I've only heard that number referenced in relation to the 155mm guns.  So is that comparison an apples-to-apples comparison?  If they have a good alarming story to sell, it's not like any of our mainstream media outlets are bothered by inconvenient facts.

I know that the US also uses 105mm towed guns, but have no idea how towed guns are faring in Ukraine or how many the Ukrainians might have.  (I imagine towed artillery fares much worse than mobile artillery in hot environments due to the lack of "shoot and scoot" survivability, but I can also imagine myself winning the lottery next week.)

The real question then becomes whether they are including mortal shell production in that number.  CNN, of course, doesn't tell us.  Mortar shells certainly don't have the range, power, or utility of howitzer shells.  But, especially when used in a defensive capacity, mortars can still be very effective.  Or so I imagine (see above for disclaimers).

https://www.businessinsider.com/new-howitzer-ammo-plant-nearly-doubles-us-output-bmatch-russias-2024-5

[88mmkwk]

I'm in the ECM camp. I think drones will more often than not be targeted through electronic means. Point defense weaponry platforms would be too costly for targeting all but the largest drones and those are capable of flying at altitude.

With respect to direct attacks against smaller commercially available drones, outside of more traditional man portable kinetic arms, I think ultimately next gen weaponry will prove most viable, such as laser, sonic, etc.

Something like this is pretty interesting: Portable Rifle EMP

It would of course result in drones with addition EMP protection being developed, but that all adds weight and so the chess game of counter-moves would continue....

[Con]

The trajectory ultimately is independent drones with AI
That means first line is ECM local superiority
Point defense
And I think we will eventually see hunter killer drones optimized for speed to rundown the leakers
The best weapon to shoot down a plane was another plane and that's a historical bet the drones will end up making as well

[JasonPratt]

I keep hearing Brad Fidel's Terminator theme gearing up in my head when I read about hunter-killer drones...

Not that I disagree with the expectation. Just disturbing.

[Con]

You should be very disturbed
Removing a human from the decision loop leads to many troubling issues especially as the ramifications are very troubling as defense companies are incentivized to make their product the deadliest

[Uberhaus]

I know that the US also uses 105mm towed guns, but have no idea how towed guns are faring in Ukraine or how many the Ukrainians might have.  (I imagine towed artillery fares much worse than mobile artillery in hot environments due to the lack of "shoot and scoot" survivability, but I can also imagine myself winning the lottery next week.)

From over a year ago:  https://www.forbes.com/sites/craighooper/2023/05/14/russia-hits-immobile-and-predictable-m-777-krab-and-m-109-howitzers-hard/?sh=44d7467a6f19

[Jarhead0331]

From this Sunday's issue of the Merge...

High Power Microwave

Tech advancements and the proliferation of drone capabilities are challenging the air domain in ways that are so disruptive that they have inverted the cost imposition and are challenging the entire notion that the US military (and its Allies) can protect forces on the ground from attack via the air littorals.
The heart of the issue is that defending against the rapid cost and capability improvements of drones is often relegated to using exquisite weapons that were never designed to counter this threat. Or worse, having no defenses at all and hoping that a military position won't get attacked.

The result: the extremely high cost of playing defense is simply no match for the extremely low cost of playing offense. To this point, the Navy expended $1 billion in weapons shooting down threats in the Middle East in the past 6 months.

Changing the Game

High-tech doesn't win, and low-tech doesn't lose—it's all about the 'right-tech.'
Right-tech is about creating and exploiting an asymmetric capability advantage—building a new strength and applying it directly to the opposition's weakest point.
Enter high-power microwave (HPM) weapons. These are directed-energy weapons that emit concentrated bursts of electromagnetic energy and neutralize drones by disrupting their electronic systems.

While HPM has been in various stages of R&D for generations, the combination of key technological leaps is finally bringing this capability to the field. Epirus is a venture-backed defense tech startup leading the way with its flagship HPM product called Leonidas.

On the front end, Leonidas leverages a Gallium Nitride-based radar antenna array, the same tech that all next-gen AESA radars are moving to—including the new Patriot radar and the new F-35 radar.
On the back end, it uses solid-state electronics similar to the EA-18G Growler's new jammer.

It's combined with software to create and adjust waveforms, like a radar jammer that gets rapid updates with new techniques. They also utilize neural networks (a type of AI) to analyze patterns and rapidly optimize the system's performance.

The Result

Epirus' Leonidas puts up a shield of energy that disables pretty much anything that flies into it.

Unlike laser systems or kinetic methods, which attack one target at a time, HPM can attack multiple drones simultaneously—a unique capability that's particularly valuable against swarming drone attacks that typically overwhelm traditional defenses. And it does it for just a few dollars per shot.

Fun Fact: HPMs like Leonidas don't fry electronics. They simply disrupt the flow of signals on the analog side of electronics, typically resulting in motors turning off and systems rebooting. This makes HPMs an ideal option for non-lethal drone defense around critical infrastructure, sporting events, etc.

Speeding to Field

The Army's Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office (RCCTO) has led the way with these next-gen HPMs. Epirus recently delivered 4 prototypes to the Army for testing and also completed developmental testing.

These systems are part of the Army's Indirect Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) program, specifically the IFPC-HPM layer. Almost immediately after Epirus delivered the fourth system, the Army revealed Leonidas HPMs were being deployed ASAP to the Middle East.

The results of this prototype deployment will determine the Army's next steps, but Epirus isn't waiting. They have preemptively invested in a 100,000 sq ft factory and inventory to scale production.

What Now

While the Army is leading the way, the Navy is also interested in using Leonidas to protect ships from drone boats. They will be zapping boats off the coast of California in a naval exercise this summer.

There is so much more to unpack in the podcast. We dive deep into how HPMs work, the operational environment, and how to integrate HPMs into layered defenses—plus some myth-busting about copper tape.

[Jarhead0331]

Here:

[acctingman]

NOT a political question at ALL!! 

I read this post a lot and follow the news a bit on the Ukraine/Russian war and I have a question for you all (who know WAY more than I do).

In your opinion on a scale of 1 (no way in hell) to 5 (a for sure YES) how likely do you see the Ukraine/Russian war spilling over to a global conflict?

Thanks