Right now, we’re seeing drone strikes help turn the tide in the war between Russia and Ukraine. Small first-person view (FPV) drones target soldiers as soon as they are visible. Drones armed with explosives target tanks, infantry carriers, military trucks, radar installations, and artillery. Large drones capable of flying hundreds of kilometers are striking the Russian homeland, including strategic ports, oil refineries and storage tanks, and parts of Moscow. Water-based drones blow up ships and rescue downed airmen.
Russia may have hypersonic missiles, but a few dozen missiles—no matter how scary—are trumped by several hundred drones. And Ukraine can launch hundreds of drones a night.
Powerless
Russia finds itself in the same position as the U.S., where it is forced to use an expensive interceptor to knock down a cheap drone. Drones are plentiful, ground-to-air missiles are often scarce. They are meant to shoot down ballistic missiles, enemy fighter jets, or bombers, not propeller-driven drones that look like an entry in a high school science competition.
Zero Hedge reported Thursday that:
Russia’s Defense Ministry said air defense systems downed 555 Ukrainian drones across 17 regions and occupied Crimea.
Ukrainian forces said they shot down four of seven Russian ballistic missiles and 212 of 239 drones targeting Kyiv, Poltava, Chernihiv, and Sumy.
That’s 794 drones and only seven missiles. Wouldn’t surprise me if all 794 drones combined cost less than the seven missiles.
Moscow is burning. Muscovites are upset that the war is hitting them where they live. Putin should be worried.
A New Arms Race
While drones may be relatively new, the idea of an arms race is not. Throughout the ages, new technology has tipped the scales of war in favor of one party until the other adopts or develops a counter to it. Early examples include the chariot, which allowed the Hyksos to conquer lower Egypt. Later, the Egyptians copied the technology and pharaohs like Ramesses II led massive chariot armies. The Battle of Kadesh in 1274 BC reportedly featured between 5,000 and 6,000 chariots.
Centuries later, plate armor allowed the fully armored knight to rule the battlefield until the crossbow and the English longbow—which had a draw weight of up to 150 pounds—were designed to punch through armor. Similarly, the cannonball could punch through the high walls of a medieval castle, as Constantinople found out in 1453.
More recently, we have the machine gun, which could mow down ranks of men, until the British developed the tank, which protected its occupants from small cartridges. Of course, this, in turn, led to more powerful guns and shoulder-fired munitions intended to knock tanks out of the battle. Today, the role of the bazooka and rocket-propelled grenade has been usurped by the Javelin missile and the drone.
The Next Step
Already in Ukraine, we’ve seen how the use of jammers to disrupt FPV drones has resulted in drones that string out several miles of fiber-optic cable behind them, allowing them to be guided by their remote pilots via “wire” rather than satellite signal or radio waves that can be disrupted by the enemy.
One day soon, maybe next week, maybe in a few years, the U.S. and other advanced armies will field new weapons that can knock drones down with lasers or perhaps microwaves instead of expensive kinetic weapons. Already, “drone rounds” are being created that allow the average infantryman armed with a rifle to have a better chance of shooting down an FPV drone than a shotgunner will have. When these new developments reach the battlefield, the lines will shift again, and the drone will be less of a deciding factor. But that day is still in the future. Until then, Russia is in trouble.
Ukraine withstood the initial Russian assault until they could develop the technology with which to fight back. It is yet to be written whether Russia can rapidly develop and field the technology to successfully counter Ukraine’s ability to launch 500 or more drones a day.
I tend to doubt it.
Prepper Lessons
What can we as preppers take from the rise of drones and their use in possibly turning the tables in the Ukrainian war? I see two lessons:
First, geography cannot save you. This is an important reminder for preppers like me who retreat off the beaten path. A remote location can offer a buffer from the golden horde, but technology means we cannot hide forever. The French relied on the Maginot Line as World War II brewed. When Germany invaded, France found it had prepared to fight the last war. The German Blitzkrieg tactics rendered it useless as armored divisions circumvented the heavy defenses and entered France after crossing Belgium and the Netherlands. We must not rely on prepper philosophy of the 1990s but adapt as technology changes.
Second, we need to investigate what drones can do for us. I own a tiny drone; more of a toy than a tool, yet it shows me the value drones can have for surveillance and reconnaissance. While it might take a three-man patrol and a static look out or guard to secure our property, a single drone operator can take the drone up 500 or 1,000 feet and look for movement, switch to thermal and see heat signatures, scan the road, check the other side of the mountain, and make sure the crops and the herds are OK.
Drones also have downsides for preppers. Just as the Russians can jam drones, a sophisticated foe might detect the radio waves used to control your drone. In that case, your use of a drone might pinpoint your location for a savvy foe. Of course, it might also convince them to seek a weaker, less-prepared target. There’s no way to know.
Finally, drones may be used to surveil us. But that’s a whole other article.
