A new paper by Professor Justin Bronk, published by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), argues that NATO should not attempt to replace traditional military firepower with massed drones.
Drawing on lessons from Ukraine’s ongoing war with Russia, the piece warns that uncrewed aerial systems (UAS) cannot substitute for the role played by airpower, artillery and armoured forces in high-intensity warfare, according to the publication.
In the article titled NATO Should Not Replace Traditional Firepower with ‘Drones’, Bronk writes that “it would be a mistake for NATO forces to rely heavily on massed small UAS and long range OWA drones to replace traditional weapons systems in pursuit of improved lethality.” While Ukraine has made extensive and innovative use of first-person view (FPV) drones and one-way attack (OWA) systems, he argues that this has been driven by necessity and is not a model Western militaries can or should emulate.
Russia, the paper notes, has become the world leader in counter-UAS capabilities. “Only a small fraction of the huge volumes of drones launched by Ukrainian forces reach their targets, and a still smaller proportion achieve decisive damage when they do,” Bronk observes. He adds that Russia’s integrated use of jamming, air defences and electronic warfare significantly limits the impact of massed drone attacks.
Bronk also warns that Western procurement systems and regulatory environments are poorly suited to replicating Ukraine’s wartime drone innovation and production. “Western forces aiming to transform their lethality using similar UAS-dependent tactics are starting from a far lower base than Ukrainian forces today,” he writes.
Instead of overcommitting to drone-based capabilities, the paper argues NATO should invest in enabling drones to support traditional platforms. UAS, Bronk suggests, can be used to saturate enemy air defences or conduct electronic attack in support of long-range fires and manned air operations. “There are many ways that UAS can and already do contribute to NATO’s force structure and capabilities, but generally they are most potent as a means to enable artillery and aircraft to strike targets responsively,” he writes.
Readers can access the full paper on the RUSI website: NATO Should Not Replace Traditional Firepower with ‘Drones’.
Denys Davydov’s youtube channel recently showed a brief tank battle between a UKR T-64 and a Russian (assumed T-72) that had been clad with ‘drone’ protection. The T-64 won the battle. The T-72 was too buttoned down in the cladding to turn its turret
OK, at the moment, drones have the battlefield at a standstill. IMHO, there will be good enough counter-measures in the future that maneuver warfare can happen again.
Thing is you have to able to cover both bases.
Drones are seen as cheap force multipliers – in the UK that is an obsession as there is no significant new money on the table.
But the big kinetic stuff still has its uses.