ZAP // Dall-E-3
In almost every war in the past, technological innovations emerged that changed the balance of forces on the battlefield—followed by countermeasures that negated the advantages of those innovations. The same is happening now with drones.
As with many other previous conflicts, the war between Russia and Ukraine forced both sides to innovate.
As neither country managed to gain decisive control over enemy airspace, practically nohave not used traditional aerial meanssuch as fast fighters, which take a long time to build and have a high cost — which, therefore, cannot be easily risked in the theater of war.
Instead, It is now drones that dominate the war. According to figures that have been released by Ukraine, drones are responsible for a overwhelming percentage of all casualties suffered by the country, standing between 60% and 70%.
However, history shows that technological advances in war they are often followed by the development of countermeasures — and we are witnessing precisely the emergence of anti-drone weapons that could reduce its importance in the Ukrainian conflict and beyond, notes the analyst Matthew Powellresearcher at the University of Portsmouth, in an article in .
The use of drones altered the very character of the warwidening the zone in which ground forces are vulnerable to lethal attacks to between about 9.5 and 14.5 kilometers behind the front line.
This ability made trenches, fortified positions and armored vehicles very more vulnerable than they were in the past.
It’s not just in the offensive role that drones have proven their value, although their use in information, surveillance and reconnaissance missions is remarkably similar to that performed by planes and balloons during the first world war.
Drones have been used to provide real-time intelligence and knowledge of the battlefield, facilitating planning and command, control and communications at the intermediate level.
The ability to remain flying over the same area over long periods, combined with the difficulty in neutralizing these media, has also led to their use in observation and correction of artillery fire.
It has been argued that drones, and more generally unmanned aerial vehicles, represent a radical change in the way modern wars are fought and that these means will shape the future of aerial warfare for a significant period.
But this argument ignores the fact that whenever new technologies are introduced in the context of war, countermeasures and innovations competitors tend to appear quickly, reducing its effectiveness.
A well-known case is that of first use of combat vehicles which occurred on the western front of World War I, during Battle of the Sommewhich lasted five months, in 1916.
Despite the radical impulse that the first tanks gave to the allied forces, the Germans managed to quickly neutralize this effect, having resorted, at the beginning of 1917, to powerful anti-armor cannons.
Fight drones
Similar developments are being observed in Ukraine, where simple countermeasures such as protective netsare being used to reduce the effectiveness of drones — which, however, offer a limited degree of protection.
But elsewhere, countermeasures are being developed to combat technologically advanced drones. much more sophisticated.
In January last year, the British Ministry of Defense announced the development of a high-power laser mounted on a ship, dubbed DragonFirewhich could visible” at the speed of light.
Each shot from the new weapon, which can hit a target the size of a euro coin at a distance of one kilometer, lasts 10 seconds and costs less than 11.68 euros.
This means that means such as drones become much more vulnerable to new defensive capabilities, and calls into question the idea that drones are inevitably the future of aerial warfare.
Despite DragonFire’s limitations, including the need to have the target within line of sight, the system illustrates the constant game of technological response and counter-response that largely characterizes war.
The UK is also testing another type of directed energy weapon, based on radio frequency systems. The new futuristic British weapon uses — at 13 cents per shot.
This system has advantages over DragonFire. The first is that it does not depend on line of sight, can be used in bad weather and with low and very cloudy skies. DragonFire, on the contrary, has to “see” the target to be able to engage it effectively.
The second is that a radio pulse weapon can hit multiple targets in a defined area, while DragonFire can only attack one target at a time.
Mass big disadvantage of a radio pulse weapon is that you can’t discriminate between the targets it hits. This means that friendly aircraft cannot fly in the area while this system is in use.
The traditional pace of development of new military technologies and their respective countermeasures, a central feature of almost all wars, shows no signs of slowing down in the conflicts of the 21st century.
So while drones are probably here to stay as important weapons, the idea that they will revolutionize warfare and make manned aircraft obsolete remains, for now, to be proven.
