@Red Leg
I am curious as to your thoughts regarding the future of tanks. With what drones are doing in Ukraine to tanks, are tanks now obsolete on the modern battlefield?
Also regarding what drones are doing in the Black and Red Seas, is the modern navy in close support operations now a thing of the past?
Appreciate your opinions on these subjects.
That is the question of the day. I do not believe it is likely possible to achieve a rupture in a defensive belt of any type and then exploit it without armor. Otherwise, we are repeating the battles of Cold Harbor or perhaps the Somme. A breakthrough can only be as deep as the physical exhaustion of the attacking force.
Currently, both Ukraine and Russia have proven that command directed UAVs are capable of killing armor. Armor acting without integrated fire support against a prepared defense is clearly particularly vulnerable. One daily can pull up from the web a set of new videos showing the destruction of individual armor vehicles or platforms operating in small groups.
The US does not yet have an effective technical solution to this threat, but it is worth noting a US corps deployed in Ukraine would not be fighting anything like the Russians or Ukrainians. The US uses massive fire support. Where the Ukrainians fire one or two rounds or the Russians 6-12 in support of a platoon size assault, the US would be firing hundreds at both precisely identified and likely suppression targets throughout the depth of the battlefield using both artillery and ground attack assets as whole brigades moved forward in the attack.
Identifying reconnaissance assets (recon UAV launch points) would be particularly high value targets. A FPV (suicide drone) has a soda straw view of the battlefield, and are of little use without the ability of the operators to be directed to targets on the battlefield.
Once a breakthrough is achieved and the battle shifts from penetration to exploitation, piloted attack drones become much more difficult to employ because of the fluidity of the battlefield. Additionally, a truly modern integrated task force will employ extensive jamming technology to deny command directed FPVs the ability to close with their targets.
I would note Israeli forces in both Gaza and along the Lebanese border. There are virtually no videos of either Hamas or Hezbollah successfully attacking Israeli armor with these weapons. I think one can be assured it isn't for lack of trying. But, unlike Ukraine and clearly Russian forces, Israel utilizes a integrated surveillance, identification, disruption, and attack structure that is designed to kill the UAV threat at its source and thwart it in the target area.
Back to the Ukraine environment, once a rupture is achieved and the battle moves into the exploitation phase, it is very difficult to see how FPV's will be very effective on a truly mobile battlefield.
I am far more concerned about the next generation. Self-targeting swarms of loitering munitions are well into development. These require no comms link that can be jammed. The munition simply seeks and IDs a target from the catalog in its on board chip and attacks. These will be difficult to stop. Several NATO countries, including the US, are testing radar directed machine gun solutions for close defense of the task force. Lasers or microwave will eventually be more effective.
Unfortunately, I suspect the US will have to actually face the things before we fully deploy effective defensive systems. We will, however, like the Israelis, fight a fully integrated force.
I am far from a navel expert, but we already have fairly effective close defense weapons systems for cruise missiles and the like. I am told, that software tweaking would allow them to be pretty effective against unmanned surface naval drones. Perhaps, one of our naval alumni can chime in.