In WW1 we started with fixed defenses, countered by artillery spam, then we moved to the elastic defense to counter atillery spam.Subsequently in WW2 we developed the mobile defense, where a mobile armored reserve was held nearby waiting to counterattack the enemy.Since then there hasn't been any real changes, Cold War era doctrine all the way up to the start of the Ukrainian invasion of 2022 have largely stayed the same, just more effective, an elastic defensive line and a mobile reserve was the main tactic used thoroughly most of this conflict even.But now there's the claim that a new method has been developed, the availability of highly attritable drones have enabled the creation of a transparent killzone where everything is seen and hit with precise and deadly strikes.The question is, can we say that these new developments mark the beginning of a real shift in doctrine and what does that mean for future procurement of equipment and development of new training methods?Is the mobile reserve dead? Do we still need an outpost line?
>>65062815>new thing is just the old thing but gayAlways
This is just no man's land, isn't it?
>>65062815These are the perfect answer to drones.Flak towers set up with M2 sentry turrets, radars, microwave systems or lasers, maybe a few containerized VAMPIRE systems.As long as you can keep them fed, nothing will damage the actual tower.
>>65062858I don't doubt that they could be effective, but that's just another defensive asset, we don't have a problem with defense now, it's the opposite, also they might warrant the use of something heavier like JDAMs equivalents or even a ballistic missile, so I'm not sure if they really that useful in this context.
>>65062858>nothing will damage the actual towerI bet a FAB-9000 would do something. Highly mobile, attritable platforms are the way.
>>65062837Infiltration tactics were developed to deal with the problem of firepower to cross the so called no man's land, the main thing is that you could infiltrate a force with enough combat power to accomplish their objectives, even up to very recently that was possible, the claim is that he new doctrine allows for 24/7 omnipresent survaillance and precise strikes, the delay between detection and strike is short and getting shorter, so you can't hope to infiltrate and concentrante any meaningful force beyond that line.
>>65062888checkedand yeah, that's on me for not finishing reading through the wiki article lol
>>65062815Not the start but rather it further sements a change that's been hard to swallow since the early 00s, the transparent battlefield. Satelites and surveilence drones already made it so you know what's happening everywhere, the influx of cheap quadrocopters just made it so you get that information quicker.
>>65062858Need to put in a HIMAD system to contest aerial bomb attacks against the tower.>>65062884CEP +/- a city block so several would be needed to even hit the thing in the first place. It'd suck to deal with aviation bombs but that's what the SAM part of it would be for.
>>65062815>Ukranians and Russians are retards >Thus everyone is retarded Friendly reminder that the Ukranian summer offensive failed because they ignored the explicit advise of NATO planners by dividing their forces sending half to Bahkmut and dividing the remaining half into two axis of attack thus depriving their forces of the mass required to punch through the Russian defensive belt. These people are idiots, but they are winning because the Russians are fucking retarded
>>65063145Every single conflict we're seeing has drones being a seismic game changer. In the question of predictive truths, we can either believe in what is explicitly in front of us or in the equivalent of 2-more-weeks-coulda-woulda-shoulda theoreticians like you.When the shiite shits were slinging drones at us we didn't have some non-retarded wunderwaffle on hand to bat away the highly attritable drones. We had to tank them on the face, abandon bases, or flee out of range on our ships. So we finally have practical field examples of what happens when not just a first rate country but THE first rate military in all of human history encounters this new variable and we get slapped around same as everyone else.It might change in the future if we speed run drones but spare us with the tedious "Hurp durp russians and ukrainians are just retards herp derp we can still fight like it's 2012". It is proven now that we cannot.
>>65063163Iranian drones were not, in fact, game changers. We lost less men than when we invaded Grenada. We lost less aircraft than when we liberated Kuwait. We also flew 12,000 sorties. You're retarded. Go away.
>>65063163>we can still fight like it's 2012We literally just did.
>>65062815I don't think near as much has changed as we think. After WW2, everyone was so quick to proclaim that WW1 style trench warfare dead and then only 5 years after we found ourselves in Korea with static lines again. About 30 years after that we had the Iran Iraq war once again with years of stalemate and the long trench lines. Now Ukraine. Trench warfare and static lines is just what happens when momentum is lost and armies have the time to really dig in. Ukraine and Russia were cold war for years before 2022 and spent that time building defenses. After the run on Kyiv failed, it is no wonder stalemate happened so quickly in the east of Ukraine and before the drone spam started in earnest too. The Ukraine may have showcased a bunch of new weapons but I don't think it fundamentally changed how it is fought. If there was not a single drone was used in this war, I'd still expect mostly static lines.
>>65063163>So we finally have practical field examples of what happens when not just a first rate country but THE first rate military in all of human history encounters this new variable and we get slapped around same as everyone else.That wasn't the problem with Iran, the problem with Iran is that this wasn't a "war" it was an American bombing campaign and America is not used to bombing campaigns where the enemy can bomb back to such a degree. We got a taste of it in Gulf War 1 with Iraq and its Scuds, but now the capabilities available of the third world has gotten cheaper and more accurate since then. >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_strikes_on_Saudi_ArabiaThe real issue is that America tried to dip its toe in the water but weren't willing to dive right in. They didn't call up a half million troops and roll over Iran in a proper invasion like Iraq. They hoped that if they just deleted enough things Iran would say uncle.It's like with North Vietnam. They were unwilling to conquer the country in fear of pissing off China so they just bombed it. North Vietnam was undeterred and just kept raising new units and sending them south. Iran is not connected to anything so they did the same thing with missiles and lawnmower drones.
>>65063168>We lost less men than when we invaded GrenadaWell we didn't actually Invade Iran
>>65063168I'd fucking hope you lost less people conducting an air campaign than a ground invasion, anon.
>>65063168And all you accomplished was...*checks notes*reopened a strait that was already opened, but now Iran will make billions every year by charging a toll
>>65062858Russia has already used ICBMs without nukes in Ukraine, you can pack that tower with all the AA you want but it would be still get obliterated by hypersonics because its static It could also be fucked by rocket assisted artillery if its relatively near the front
>>65064857Russian """hypersonics""" are trivially easy to shoot down because they're simple ballistic threats the same type the Germans had in WW2. They don't have HGVs or anything that can maneuver.
>>65062815I guess i just dont see much of a change in the grand scheme aside from shorter kill chains which are available to both sides. It still results in troops probing for weaker areas in the grey zone, areas it is easiest to infiltrate through. You will still need reserves to follow up on any sectors that become penetrated.
>>65064857ICBMs made to carry nukes are not particularly accurate anon.
>>65062858Germans needed hundreds of literal slaves to build these how the fuck do you think a meaningful number of these would be built inexpensively?Shit even in WW2 these things were not the majority of AA batteries. I've been to Augarten, there's like 4 towers to cover all of Vienna. I bet they did almost fucking nothing against hundreds of allied bombers massing overhead.
>>65063145And that fuck up can't be partly bless on politicians in Ukraine and the west demanding fast results that look good in the news whole military said that they do not have the manpower out equipment for it.
>>65063145This is a completely incorrect characterization of events btw, unless you're implying they should have rotated defending units out of Bakhmut and let it fall, which is an opinion so retarded that not even the vatnigs push it
>>65063145um ukraine has never ever EVER made a mistake. dont you dare say that
>>65063168American drones have been a game changer. Imagine if MQ-9 and RQ-180 existed in WW2.
>>65062837Always has been.
>>65063181There are no trenches in Ukraine anymoreTrench warfare is obsolete. The frontline is now 15km wide gray zone with drone operators in hidden dugouts monitoring the entire frontThey used to need 100 men to guard 1km of frontline. Now only 9 men are sufficient to do the same job
>>65062892Can we somehow improve trenches? Closed to tunnels, fewer open areas?
>>65063145>>65065017a NATO army with all its supporting assets could do it, UA didn't have F-16s, ATACMS, not enough fire support assets to generate the combat power needed, it would have been a major disaster, whole units would be trapped behind enemy lines and destroyed.
>>65065246There are still defensive positions made up of trenches and dugouts, just not contiguous trench lines.
>>65062815The doctrine for non-retards is>impassable buffer zone>obliterate enemy economythen you incentivize the local population to remove their regime and if they don't they just stay poor forever. Still a victory
>>65064990>nooo not Bakmutyou do realize that Bakmut fell anyways?
>>65065904>picerelunironically: why haven't we seen large scale smoke usagei saw german Rocket arty footage from ww2 and a couple of them saturated what looked liked a 5km long area with smokeor am i overestimating the effect smoke has one drone cameras?
>>65065950just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's not used, I've seen it sometimes, but smokescreens are temporary and not something interesting that people will go out of their way to film
>>65065960>just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's not used, true but i've literally never seen it being used
>>65065965
>>65065965>>65065965
>>65065971thanksseems like it could work if used en mass
>>65062815Cappy Army talking about emerging tactics in Ukraine around 18:00https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCfzwH4vZwY
>>65065977>seems like it could work if used en mass>if used en massThis part is absolutely important. I remember reading an interview with a drone operator in early 2023 or during the summer of 2022 in which he saw the russians using a few smoke generators close to a river which spiked his interest and flew over the area in which he saw russians laying pontoon bridges. The area was then hit by artillery he guided and the river crossing failed. The ironic part is that if the russians had not used a small number of smoke generators then there is a good chance the river crossing would have worked since the drone operator was not looking at that area at all since he was covering a very large sector by himself. It could have worked if the russians used smoke generators along the whole frontline, even in areas in which no river crossing is happening but they chose the worst option which is using a few smoke generators at the river crossing point only which drew attention.>>65065981B-but drones are going to replace everything. It cant just be that modern warfare is still combined arms warfare only with drones added to the mix!?
>>65066038>The ironic part is that if the russians had not used a small number of smoke generators then there is a good chance the river crossing would have worked since the drone operator was not looking at that area at all since he was covering a very large sector by himself. It could have worked if the russians used smoke generators along the whole frontline, even in areas in which no river crossing is happening but they chose the worst option which is using a few smoke generators at the river crossing point only which drew attention.This is why officers should study mitary history, feints and demonstrations are basic requirement for that kind of operation.
>>65064990>This is a completely incorrect characterization of events btwIts exactly what happened as reported by NYT. >>65065904No, if they had mass they could have punched through. Thats the whole point of mass. Its a blunt instrument.
>>65066071>No, if they had mass they could have punched throughyesIFbut they didn't. because russia has the numerical advantage since late 2022plus they still would have needed to blow up the crimean bridge at the same time
>>65066071>No, if they had mass they could have punched through. Thats the whole point of mass. Its a blunt instrument.If the Russians which had far more resources available to them didn't manage to achieve major breakthroughs through mass, then the Ukrainians wouldn't be likely to succeed either, it's easy for military planners that have never experienced real modern battlefield conditions to come up with those Cold Era plans, they aren't the ones that will deal with the consequences of failure.
>>65066080>but they didn't.Yes, because they ignored NATO planners advice and sent half their force to Bahkmut and then divided the remaining half along two axis of attack. Holy shit, circular conversation much? >>65066085NATO planners had effectively run the war up until that point. Get your head out your fucking ass. >but the Russians are shit Yes.
>>65062858Artillery rains on your static tower and destroys it, now what?
>>65065950Drones have thermals as a stock feature while most infantry, especially on the Russian side do not.
>>65063286The strait isn't even fucking open, 9 ships in total have passed since the "ceasefire" was declared
>>65062888>Infiltration tactics were developed to deal with the problem of firepower to cross the so called no man's landguess what tactics the Russians developed last year to counter the Ukrainian drones>>65062815no, it's still WW1 all the way in Ukraine, except for the EW war which you haven't discussed
>>65065938Bakhmut was also the end of Wagner, which was previously the best performing part of the Russian forces.
>>65064876Holy reading comprehension, we are not talking about their supposed hypersonic missiles we are talking about ICBMs those are hypersonic and virtually impossible to intercept >>65064927They hit dead center of infraestructure when they used them in western Ukraine
>>65066038>This part is absolutely important. I remember reading an interview with a drone operator in early 2023 or during the summer of 2022 in which he saw the russians using a few smoke generators close to a river which spiked his interest and flew over the area in which he saw russians laying pontoon bridges. The area was then hit by artillery he guided and the river crossing failed. The ironic part is that if the russians had not used a small number of smoke generators then there is a good chance the river crossing would have worked since the drone operator was not looking at that area at all since he was covering a very large sector by himself. It could have worked if the russians used smoke generators along the whole frontline, even in areas in which no river crossing is happening but they chose the worst option which is using a few smoke generators at the river crossing point only which drew attention.This >>65065974seems like it would be far more effective than this>>65065971
