Noisy, Low speed, flying-straight and low altitude... seems like easy AA gun targets if they are within the batterie's range
Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
- Status
Noisy, Low speed, flying-straight and low altitude... seems like easy AA gun targets if they are within the batterie's range
Ukraine has mentioned Gepard as being particularly effective against these Iranian drones. I would imagine PLAGFs large numbers of SPAAG and AAA would have similar results and that we will see a resurgence of such systems across the world going forward.
SPAAGs are only effective in a small area. Good enough to protect vital targets only
In your scenario above, these drones are going after airfields, pretty much the definition of vital target.
These drones will have their uses, but they only highlight the shortcomings of both UKR and RF forces.
UKR cannot maintain a full range air defence network and RF does not have an effective Air Force with SEAD and ELINT.
If the hit probability of these drones is only 20% vs. 60% for LGB, then the LGB is going to be more cost effective. On top of that, only the “high end” air defence (SM-1, Patriot, i-HAWK) can knock out jets. Avenger/Stinger and 35mm Skyguard is helpless. Those high end air defences are only semi mobile and likely to be destroyed first by MLRS and BM/CM
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
All you need to do is look at the Kosovo War. The US and NATO claimed they destroyed 90% of Serb armor. Turns out it was reverse. It was more like 10%. Remember the scene when the war was over where NATO moved in while Serbs were leaving on the same road. It was a large convoy of Serbian armor leaving. Why was Serbia able to save their armor? Decoys. Even though NATO suspected decoys, they had to hit it anyway because they weren't sure. Here every drone they know will be deadly and they're going to have to go after each one of them. The US Naval War College has conducted simulated war games of a US military attack on China for over forty years. Every time the US loses because the US can't get past the swarm after swarm after swarm of cheap anti-ship missiles China can produce.
Last edited:
It is not an either or relationship. If there are SPAAG or other short range air defense system in the area, they will be attacked by glide bombs or KD-series missiles while the cheap drone attacks continue around the clock.
Even if easy to shoot down, spending maybe 100 million USD to build 10,000 basic drones seems like a good investment. Maybe it'll do nothing, but if it does help, it would have been very stupid not do so just to save so little money.
On Taiwan there'll be an environment where most power stations and fuel depots have been taken out by ballistic missiles and airstrikes, there are fires in most cities and no internet connection. Under these circumstances, small but noisy drones at night will be hard to spot or hear above the noise of chaos and constant bombs. A devastating shock and awe campaign against the whole island could be done nonstop, depriving the enemy of sleep. If they have to shoot down 100 drones per hour while being attacked from the air by more powerful missiles at the same time, the efficiency of air defence will go down after some time.
On Taiwan there'll be an environment where most power stations and fuel depots have been taken out by ballistic missiles and airstrikes, there are fires in most cities and no internet connection. Under these circumstances, small but noisy drones at night will be hard to spot or hear above the noise of chaos and constant bombs. A devastating shock and awe campaign against the whole island could be done nonstop, depriving the enemy of sleep. If they have to shoot down 100 drones per hour while being attacked from the air by more powerful missiles at the same time, the efficiency of air defence will go down after some time.
You need to factor in the fuel cost of whatever platform is going to be carrying the JDAM, plus fighter escort.
If a reusable drone platform is used drones become far more cost effective than JDAM. A turbofan engine is more efficient than a jet engine.
10 25kg bombs are also better than one 250kg bomb as you have the option of dispersion. The one 250kg bomb is putting all eggs in one basket. It's the same reason why deployed nukes today are hundreds of kilotons rather than megatons.
But I agree it seems like these drones are the only option the Russians have.
Actually, that's one good scenario to not use suicide drones. If you already took the fixed targets, then you want to use ISR to determine the targets on the fly and then engage them. In fact, having little drones fly over a target and drop a bomb down would be better than just sending a bunch of suicide drones in there.
Light and long range suicide drone acting as slow moving missiles would make more sense for further away targets in Guam and Japan, since you can get to them with PCH191 or attack helicopters or MALE UCAVs. We will see what they do.
China will use drones and drone swarms extensively. We've seen them doing this in exercises. Don't restrict your mind to what we've seen in Ukraine. China will have much better options.
But his argument about depriving the enemy of sleep is a powerful one. If you can keep up a constant barrage over several days and night, spread evenly over the entire island, you will simply break people psychologically as lack of sleep is absolutely devastating after 48+ hours. But it would have to be an absolutely massive and sustained barrage. Of course, it would also cripple all kinds of vital infrastructure. After a few days, you just swoop in with fresh and rested troops.
- Status