Ukraine is Changing the Face of Warfare
The Russo-Ukrainian War has been going on in earnest for more than two years now (not counting the low-intensity conflict that preceded Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022). In some respects, the fighting resembles older conflicts such as World War I with its trench warfare and artillery duels. In others, it is breaking new technological and strategic ground.
One of the most interesting aspects of the war is its documentation. The war in Ukraine is being fought in the media to a greater extent than any war that preceded it, and first-person video posted to the internet is one of the ways that the two sides are rallying their supporters and trying to discourage the enemy. In the two years since the invasion, these videos have gone from light-hearted clips of Ukrainian farmers tugging abandoned Russian armored vehicles away to more violent footage of drones and missiles destroying enemy positions and killing enemy soldiers.
Some of the more recent videos remind me of scenes from “The Terminator.” In one example, a Ukrainian drone flies through the open hatch of a Russian T-90 tank before exploding and turning the tank into an inferno. Drones drop hand grenades and small bombs into vehicles and trenches. Seaborne drone boats evade gunfire and crash into Russian ships. It is surreal to watch the videos and think, “These are real people dying.” It’s easy to feel sorry for the targets of the drones such as this poor Russian soldier caught in the open who makes the sign of the cross as a drone runs him down. In at least one instance, a Russian soldier has surrendered to a drone.
Drones are plentiful and relatively cheap. Many off-the-shelf models can be configured to carry a small payload the size of a hand grenade. Given the smart, guided nature of drones, they can be more cost-effective than an artillery barrage, especially for small concentrations of enemy forces or moving targets. By some estimates, one drone can be as effective as 200 artillery shells.
Drones also fill a variety of roles. Reconnaissance drones maintain a watch over the front lines and provide intelligence and targeting information for the operators of explosive kamikaze drones. Long-range drones have hit targets deep inside Russia. In one instance, a refinery almost 750 miles from Ukraine was hit by a drone attack. Drones have destroyed bridges, sunk ships, and destroyed expensive weapon systems like supersonic bombers and air defense radars. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that the high concentrations of drones make it difficult to move safely near the front lines and resupply soldiers at the front. Resupply is now often accomplished by drone as well.
Outnumbered and short of resources, desperation has driven innovation in Ukraine. This includes both advances in tactics as well as technology.
“It would be fair to say that Ukraine has done a great amount of work in the drone area by using the cheapest parts for drones to develop the most effective weapons,” Alexander Chernyavskiy, the head of the Ukrainian charity fund Free in Spirit told Understanding AI. “The US creates the most advanced drones in the world… in Ukraine, we don’t have resources to buy such expensive drones.”
Drones are much cheaper and easier to employ than manned weapons systems. Drones are also expendable. Operators can be trained quickly and destroyed drones can be easily replaced.
Current drones take many forms. The most common drones are small quad-copters with four lifting rotors, but some are larger and resemble conventional aircraft or the famed American MQ-1 Predator. Quad-copters like the off-the-shelf DJI Mavic can loiter for extended periods, either for reconnaissance purposes or to wait for targets of opportunity. The more conventional-style drones have higher speeds and ranges. Ukraine seems to have either created or modified a light airplane similar to a single-engine Cessna for drone attacks, using the explosive-laden aircraft to hit a Russian factory 600 miles from Ukraine.
And not all drones are aircraft. Ukraine is known to have drone boats as well. These small, maneuverable watercraft can carry out kamikaze attacks on enemy ships and bridges. Attacks by drone boats are responsible for several Russian warships being “upgraded to submarine.”
There are ground-pounding drones as well. Earlier this year, Russia sent a squad of grenade-tossing mini tanks against Ukrainian positions, but the innovative attack was beaten back by [wait for it] defending Ukrainian drones.
Defenses against drones include jamming frequencies used by their human controllers and using other weapon systems to destroy them. Current drones can be shot down with small arms fire or missiles, but these defenses often require human operators.
Many current drones are also limited by the need for human operators. The drone controller is often located near the front line and must identify targets and then fly the drone on an attack run. (This isn’t the case for the American Predator where the operator can be located halfway around the world. I once met a USAF drone pilot based in Las Vegas who was “flying” drone missions in Africa and the Middle East.) If the operations team is identified by the enemy, they can be targeted by artillery or other drones.
An obvious innovation will be to field new autonomous systems that would keep humans out of the line of fire. We may ultimately see more battles like the one described above in Ukraine in which armies of robots and drones battle each other while human generals watch from afar. We might also see robotic soldiers hunt down and attack human insurgents or soldiers from countries that cannot afford or don’t possess the technology to field robot armies.
As drones and robots become more capable, it makes less and less sense to build weapons that carry humans. Robotic aircraft can carry out maneuvers that would make human pilots black out. Human crew members need food, living space, and protection. These items all add weight, complexity, and cost. Eliminating the human crew reduces the necessary size of drone vehicles and makes them more maneuverable. All of this makes them harder to hit as well as easier to replace if they are destroyed.
Other armies and factions are paying attention. Russia has fielded its own drones on the Ukrainian front. Both the Houthis in Yemen and the Iranians have caused concern with drone attacks in recent months. Last week, the US Army hosted its inaugural drone competition at Fort Moore, Georgia.
Given the effectiveness of drones, I have to wonder how long well-equipped armies will continue putting vulnerable humans on the battlefield. Several countries, including both the United States and Russia, are experimenting with robotic soldiers. The new robot soldiers can resemble tanks, dogs, or even have a humanoid shape… somewhat like the Terminator. In the US Air Force’s new B-21 Raider, the crew is optional.
I’m not sure where all this will lead. We’ve already seen airborne drones targeting enemy forces and equipment. We are starting to see drones targeting other drones and robots. We may eventually see widespread use of drones and robots against civilian populations in terror campaigns.
Advances in AI and autonomous weaponry seem more and more like “Terminator.” Hopefully, the engineers will consider the cautionary tale of the T-1000 and take steps to ensure that Skynet never becomes self-aware.
The thing to keep in mind is that every move in the history of conventional war has a counter move. Drones have been most important in Ukraine as a defensive weapon since they prevent Russia from massing armor and personnel for a breakthrough. However to the extent we’re talking about small, cheap suicide drones, in addition to jamming, I think someone will eventually develop a lighter, maybe even automated targeting version of something like the Flakpanzer Gepard. It wasn’t designed with this kind of fighting in mind but something eventually will be, now that we know these things will need to be defended against but you don’t want to waste missiles costing 6 or 7 figures on them.Report
One thing the Ukrainians have proven is you don’t need a multi-trillion dollar military-industrial complex to innovate in war. This actually has some of my DoD colleagues worries about engaging with China, because the U.S. government can’t buy stuff that fast without breaking close to a dozen laws.Report
Counter-point… It’s not the effectiveness of the drones by themselves, it’s those in combination with artillery. The Ukrainians are running through about 10,000 rounds of artillery ammo per month, and would like to have much more. The Russians are, I believe, still managing to fire off about 30,000 artillery rounds per month. Both figures dwarf the number of drones. The surprises are that armor has been largely useless*, and attack helicopters as well, because one infantryman can carry a tank- or helicopter-killer.
The war is an artillery duel at various ranges and with various means of improving accuracy.
* Armor meaning tanks. Armored infantry vehicles have played a role. The only chance that this was going to be settled by armor was if the Russians had pulled off the initial three-day dash to Kyiv.Report
Yes, the main lesson seems to be that drone and missile tech is moving us back to a World War I style of fighting where artillery (aimed with drones and protected from aircraft by missiles) dominates. Tanks are just lumbering drone/artillery targets. Infantry still struggles with all the mass-the-bullets-in-the-air technology that it has long struggled with. Airforces and navies are kept well away by missiles and the fog of war has never been thinner.
I do wonder why a drone killing drone hasn’t been developed yet. Like, some drone that carries a weapon that can shred another drone. You can take drones down with missiles, but the cost of the missile dwarfs the drone. I’m puzzled as to what the technical challenges are for a drone that scoots up to other drones and, I don’t know, flak cannons them to death, or something, then moves on to the next one.Report
Just because you are not aware publicly of a certain system or technology, do not assume it does not exist. The U.S. Navy and Air Force have been operating all sorts of drones for all sorts of purposes for 20 plus years. Only a few have ever been declassified.Report
Sure, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if we have some billion dollar drone killer tucked away somewhere at the DoD.
But is a drone hunting drone really that so hard? Shouldn’t there be a dozen versions of DHD’s prowling the skies of Ukraine right now? Both sides have every reason to develope one but all I read about are ground to air anti drone devices. Jets are very fast and, accordingly, require missiles to reliably knock out of the sky but, my understanding is, that drones are much slower devices and they’re not particularly physically robust. So, outside our state-of-the-art classified field what is it about drones that makes drone-hunting drones unfeasible? I genuinely don’t know.Report
object detection and identification require a fair amount of compute power – which is hard to physically get on a quad copter that is of the size being used. Which is why most of the ones known publicly are not on the drones themselves.
Like these:
https://potomacofficersclub.com/articles/10-anti-drone-weapons-used-by-the-u-s-military/Report
For sure, but let’s stipulate that the drones aren’t making any of the decisions about targeting. Say in the UK battlespace the UK command is going to have a pretty good idea of which of those drones up there are theirs and which ones aren’t. Why can’t they send a drone up to the loiter around near the enemy drones and, I don’t know, spray them with a cheap little flak cannon or deploy foam into their props or zap em with a laser or whatever?
That’s my main curiosity. Why’s it gotta be a ground based manned weapon or a million-dollar missile? A manned anti-drone weapon is, itself, a drone target and all the devices on your excellent list are enormously more expensive than the drones they’re aimed at. Why can’t drones be scrapped by other drones?Report
Compute power vs. battery power vs. battle space sensor packages vs. battery power vs. comms systems vs. battery power. The systems you need to do all that on the platform take up spaces, add weight, require greater thrust and thus bigger batteries which in turn require bigger props and large motors … There are drone hunting drone that exist in the world . . . but at the moment the shoulder launched things are easier to account for.Report
My guess is it will be here sooner than we think. Missile defense has already proven way more plausible than people thought it was 20 or 30 years ago. One concept might be launching waves of cheap drones once attack is detected that either jam the enemy drones or that paint themselves as diversionary targets so that instead of intercepting they are attracting the payload to them.
You can also use things like the Gepards that are expensive (but not that expensive) as a full system but are just using a form of machine gun ammunition that isn’t.Report
Like I said – just because you haven’t seen in yet, don’t assume it doesn’t exist. Aerial and oceanic drone tech is a major part of my day job these days.Report
That is a good point and I accept it. DHD’s are probably harder than I’m thinking when you factor in targeting and weight.Report