I agree with the article. With every new capability, there will inevitably be new tactics and countermeasures to defeat it. For example, with small drones, I’ve seen counter-drone technology rapidly emerging everywhere. There were a lot of displays several years ago at Modern Day Marine. However, developing a technical countermeasure is only half the battle. The real challenge is acquiring that technology in mass, deploying it across the force, ensuring personnel have the right skills to use it effectively, and integrating them into normal operations. This process will happen, but it won't happen overnight. We just need to be faster than our potential adversaries. It's clear that small drones can inflict significant damage and casualties on a frugal budget.
With every counter measure is a man taken off the battlefield, the proverbial boots on the ground. Thus far I have seen, in videos and write ups, individual drones doing the work. What will happen when there is a mass of them with AI support doing the deed? Even the "hundreds of drones" sent by Iran to Israel after the killing of the Hamas leader, they were all nothing more than cruise missiles with rotors or wings. What happens when AI gets "learned" enough to do tactical maneuvers and make decisions based on threat levels? I know they, us and our potential adversaries, are working on that very thing.
Scary video! No doubt, if someone can imagine it, we can probably build it. A quote from the video: "They can pretty much stop any countermeasure, they cannot be stopped" is a very optimistic claim.
Drones, drones and more drones, but they are a long way off before they will be strategically decisive. What is decisive is the current US space-based and satellite systems. Reading General McKenzie’s book The Melting Point, he discusses how CENTCOM traces and kills Baghdadi and Soleimani. In the Soleimani operation, the bad guy is tracked from Tehran (boarding the airplane), to a stop in Damascus, and then into the Baghdad Airport. He is tracked and IDed as he steps off the airplane, steps into his vehicle, and begins (and ends) his trip moving down “Route Irish” by a MQ-9 Drone.
Soleimani is in a two vehicle convoy that disappears in “a great flash of white arced across the screen”. For good measure they use a total of eight weapons “just to ensure success”. General McKenzie then discusses Iran’s retaliation where Iran “attempted to launch a total of sixteen missiles, all from mobile launchers” from western Iran. The General uses the word “attempted” because one blows up upon launch, four missiles break up in flight. The other 11 missiles do hit the US Al Asad Air Base where all personnel are protected in bunkers after a launch warning from CENTCOM.
The point here is the missile tracking is done by NORAD using the Space-Based Infrared System. “This system uses satellites equipped with infrared sensors to detect missile launches by identifying the heat signatures from the rockets”. Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) provides global surveillance and early warning capabilities, helping to protect the US “and its allies from missile threats”. I also understand that US Navy combatant ships have the ability to gain access to this satellite system providing an over the horizon capability.
This raises the question: Why is the US Marine Corps developing anti-ship missiles as “leave behind forces”? Seems to me that the US Navy has a good handle on anti-ship warfare in combination with their anti-missile defense systems. The other services and Combatant Commanders have the operational level drone development covered. The National Joint Command Centers have the strategic missile launch detection lane covered. The US Army should be working the anti-missile defense lane. I am thinking of the Niki air defense system the US Army established back in the 1950s. Shouldn’t the Marines be focused on capturing advanced bases and airfields providing the opportunity to extend anti-missile defenses for detected operational and strategic missile launches?
Now my “2 cents”. In my opinion, what the Marine Corps should focus their development effort on the tactical drone “lane”. The squad leader needs a tactical drone that is light weight, with around a 5 Km range, that can be quickly launched and recovered (loitering drones are targets), and can be networked into the company and battalion commander. Semper Fi
I agree with the article. With every new capability, there will inevitably be new tactics and countermeasures to defeat it. For example, with small drones, I’ve seen counter-drone technology rapidly emerging everywhere. There were a lot of displays several years ago at Modern Day Marine. However, developing a technical countermeasure is only half the battle. The real challenge is acquiring that technology in mass, deploying it across the force, ensuring personnel have the right skills to use it effectively, and integrating them into normal operations. This process will happen, but it won't happen overnight. We just need to be faster than our potential adversaries. It's clear that small drones can inflict significant damage and casualties on a frugal budget.
With every counter measure is a man taken off the battlefield, the proverbial boots on the ground. Thus far I have seen, in videos and write ups, individual drones doing the work. What will happen when there is a mass of them with AI support doing the deed? Even the "hundreds of drones" sent by Iran to Israel after the killing of the Hamas leader, they were all nothing more than cruise missiles with rotors or wings. What happens when AI gets "learned" enough to do tactical maneuvers and make decisions based on threat levels? I know they, us and our potential adversaries, are working on that very thing.
It reminds me of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7mIX_0VK4g
How long before this is a reality? 10 years....tops.
Scary video! No doubt, if someone can imagine it, we can probably build it. A quote from the video: "They can pretty much stop any countermeasure, they cannot be stopped" is a very optimistic claim.
Other statements in history:
- "We will bury you." – Nikita Khrushchev, Soviet Premier, 1956
- "The war to end all wars." regarding World War I
I vote for us to contract for a countermeasure for every drone/AI capability we build.
Drones, drones and more drones, but they are a long way off before they will be strategically decisive. What is decisive is the current US space-based and satellite systems. Reading General McKenzie’s book The Melting Point, he discusses how CENTCOM traces and kills Baghdadi and Soleimani. In the Soleimani operation, the bad guy is tracked from Tehran (boarding the airplane), to a stop in Damascus, and then into the Baghdad Airport. He is tracked and IDed as he steps off the airplane, steps into his vehicle, and begins (and ends) his trip moving down “Route Irish” by a MQ-9 Drone.
Soleimani is in a two vehicle convoy that disappears in “a great flash of white arced across the screen”. For good measure they use a total of eight weapons “just to ensure success”. General McKenzie then discusses Iran’s retaliation where Iran “attempted to launch a total of sixteen missiles, all from mobile launchers” from western Iran. The General uses the word “attempted” because one blows up upon launch, four missiles break up in flight. The other 11 missiles do hit the US Al Asad Air Base where all personnel are protected in bunkers after a launch warning from CENTCOM.
The point here is the missile tracking is done by NORAD using the Space-Based Infrared System. “This system uses satellites equipped with infrared sensors to detect missile launches by identifying the heat signatures from the rockets”. Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) provides global surveillance and early warning capabilities, helping to protect the US “and its allies from missile threats”. I also understand that US Navy combatant ships have the ability to gain access to this satellite system providing an over the horizon capability.
This raises the question: Why is the US Marine Corps developing anti-ship missiles as “leave behind forces”? Seems to me that the US Navy has a good handle on anti-ship warfare in combination with their anti-missile defense systems. The other services and Combatant Commanders have the operational level drone development covered. The National Joint Command Centers have the strategic missile launch detection lane covered. The US Army should be working the anti-missile defense lane. I am thinking of the Niki air defense system the US Army established back in the 1950s. Shouldn’t the Marines be focused on capturing advanced bases and airfields providing the opportunity to extend anti-missile defenses for detected operational and strategic missile launches?
Now my “2 cents”. In my opinion, what the Marine Corps should focus their development effort on the tactical drone “lane”. The squad leader needs a tactical drone that is light weight, with around a 5 Km range, that can be quickly launched and recovered (loitering drones are targets), and can be networked into the company and battalion commander. Semper Fi