The War in the Ukraine

[bebops]

Drones are going to be a big challenge. This is why I advocate to build drones over cold war stuff like aircraft carriers, tanks.

Instead of having hundreds of sailors running a destroyer, each of them should be a drone operator instead.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Neurosmith]

US Air Bases and Navy ships have had numerous drone incursions and encounters over the last seven or more years. There isn’t a good solution for this problem yet, especially in bases that are not in remote locations.

As you can see with this Ukrainian attack, normal looking trucks can be driven close to the base, pulled over to the side of the road, or parked in a gas station and then left. Rumours are these drones used AI for their attacks, so they might have not needed a man in the loop making them even more independent.

One solution is build and house all types of aircraft in hardened shelters. This would obviously be expensive upfront and maintenance heavy. You also need some sort of soft kill (EW or directed energy) and hard kill systems in place. Which is again more infrastructure and maintenance.

At some point, the resources required to shield these bases from drone swarms, be it point defense systems or laser systems or microwave emitters or hardened shelters, become prohibitively expensive, especially when juxtaposed with the low price of operating FPV drones. A nation with limited funds could only afford to defend bases it deems are critical or most prone to these attacks. Of course, Russia did not expect that bases 3000 miles from the Ukrainian front are at a risk level that warrants this level of defense against drones.

Which brings me to my main point, which is that a country should not be forced to defend against these attacks if it had the ability to detect hostile forces crossing its borders. Having to defend bases against these attacks means that your upstream lines of defense have all failed.

Today may have been an airbase attack but tomorrow could be something entirely different if you don't even have the capability of monitoring activity within your own national boundaries.

 

[siegecrossbow]

At some point, the resources required to shield these bases from drone swarms, be it point defense systems or laser systems or microwave emitters or hardened shelters, become prohibitively expensive, especially when juxtaposed with the low price of operating FPV drones. A nation with limited funds could only afford to defend bases it deems are critical or most prone to these attacks. Of course, Russia did not expect that bases 3000 miles from the Ukrainian front are at a risk level that warrants this level of defense against drones.

Which brings me to my main point, which is that a country should not be forced to defend against these attacks if it had the ability to detect hostile forces crossing its borders. Having to defend bases against these attacks means that your upstream lines of defense have all failed.

Today may have been an airbase attack but tomorrow could be something entirely different if you don't even have the capability of monitoring activity within your own national boundaries.

Might give Trump the perfect pretext to round up ethnic Chinese people… There is now a proven case of national security violation by under cover agents, and unlike spying this could potentially cripple the nuclear delivery capability of a country before a single shot is fired.

 

[FriedButter]

Nobody is asking the most pertinent question, which is how Ukraine managed to sneak several trucks with FPV drones throughout Russia and near these military bases.

Airbase defense is something that could be improved upon, and I don't think even NATO could've expected such faraway bases to be struck. No amount of air defenses would suffice if Russia continues to be critically incompetent at stopping Ukrainian subterfuge and sabotage operations within its own borders, which is a problem with counterintelligence and surveillance rather than military tactic.

Why do people act like NATO wasn’t involved in whatever Ukraine does. The Americans claim they know nothing about this yet the Ukrainians say they planned this over 1.5 years. We are suppose to believe the master doesn’t know what exactly their proxy is doing. Originally the 2023 Ukrainian summer offensive was touted as an 100% their plan with zero western involvement. Then the media comes out a couple years later to craps out that the entire offensive to the Black Sea was entirely planned by NATO.

 

[SlothmanAllen]

Unfortunately it looks like civilians climbed inside one of those drone trucks which then exploded.

 

[Neurosmith]

Might give Trump the perfect pretext to round up ethnic Chinese people… There is now a proven case of national security violation by under cover agents, and unlike spying this could potentially cripple the nuclear delivery capability of a country before a single shot is fired.

You technically don't even need personnel to direct this sort of operation within the opponent's territory. The advent of autonomous vehicles and the small size/signature of these drones make them quite difficult to track, especially when dealing with a porous border like that between Ukraine and Russia.

 

[Neurosmith]

Why do people act like NATO wasn’t involved in whatever Ukraine does. The Americans claim they know nothing about this yet the Ukrainians say they planned this over 1.5 years. We are suppose to believe the master doesn’t know what exactly their proxy is doing. Originally the 2023 Ukrainian summer offensive was touted as an 100% their plan with zero western involvement. Then the media comes out a couple years later to craps out that the entire offensive to the Black Sea was entirely planned by NATO.

Okay, but what exactly would Russia be capable of doing even if it was confirmed that NATO was involved in the planning?

 

[Racek49]

Nobody is asking the most pertinent question, which is how Ukraine managed to sneak several trucks with FPV drones throughout Russia and near these military bases.

Airbase defense is something that could be improved upon, and I don't think even NATO could've expected such faraway bases to be struck. No amount of air defenses would suffice if Russia continues to be critically incompetent at stopping Ukrainian subterfuge and sabotage operations within its own borders, which is a problem with counterintelligence and surveillance rather than military tactic.

So again, if Russia were about ten times smaller with the same population, your proposal would be relevant. With its size and only 145 million citizens, it is unsolvable.

 

[Neurosmith]

So again, if Russia were about ten times smaller with the same population, your proposal would be relevant. With its size and only 145 million citizens, it is unsolvable.

One can argue that investing in counterintelligence and border control is more efficient than beefing up every military base against both drone and missile attacks, especially for a country like Russia that has a large land mass and limited funds.

 

[sdkan]

Nobody is asking the most pertinent question, which is how Ukraine managed to sneak several trucks with FPV drones throughout Russia and near these military bases.

Airbase defense is something that could be improved upon, and I don't think even NATO could've expected such faraway bases to be struck. No amount of air defenses would suffice if Russia continues to be critically incompetent at stopping Ukrainian subterfuge and sabotage operations within its own borders, which is a problem with counterintelligence and surveillance rather than military tactic.

It is assembled in Kazakhstan and then transported into Russia.