Earlier in the year, the U.S. 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team suffered a crushing blow at the hands of Ukrainian drone operators from the 412th Regiment of Unmanned Systems Forces during the semiannual “Combined Resolve” exercise in Germany.
According to the reports, the drones repeatedly detected and “killed” the U.S. armored brigade during the exercise, to the extent that the U.S. assets had to be “respawned” to continue the training. Some Ukrainian drone operators then even switched over to supporting the U.S. forces, presumably to make the fight more fair. Ouch.
While it might be tempting to bemoan this American defeat as indicative of a sclerotic or outdated U.S. military, it is worth considering the similar case of a relatively cheap – and definitely stealthy – Swedish submarine that managed to “sink” a $6 Billion U.S. supercarrier in a naval exercise just over 20 years ago.
Both cases, counterintuitive as it might seem, are indicative not only of a healthy approach to military training, but also of a U.S. military that recognizes its limitations, the changing nature of warfare, and the critical need to adapt to new technologies.
The year was 2005, and off the coast of Southern California the U.S. Navy was hosting a routine Joint Task Force Exercise (JTFEX) in which it had invited the Swedish Navy to participate. The HMS Gotland, a diesel submarine that instead of an internal combustion engine, used an “old-school” type of engine known as a “Stirling,” played the role of opposing force against the then new and advanced USS Ronald Reagan and its entire Carrier Strike Group.
Much in the same way that the Ukrainian drone operators dominated the U.S. armored brigade this year, boy did the Gotland perform well back in 2005.
The Swedish sub managed to evade the entire Reagan Strike Group – with all of its advanced detection and defensive systems – and then sink the Reagan itself with multiple torpedo strikes. Adding insult to injury, the Gotland then escaped the scene of the attack undetected and undefeated.
In each of these cases, a force using ostensibly “simpler” and “less advanced” technologies handed defeat to American forces with their more expensive military kit.
In the case of the Swedish Stirling engines, those air independent propulsion (AIP) systems generate power using temperature difference to expand and contract a sealed gas (like oxygen or helium), instead of “firing” pistons (which is very loud) as in internal combustion. The Stirlings are external combustion engines, instead of internal.
Further, Stirling engines also don’t need to surface to “snorkel,” or retrieve fresh air. This makes them essentially diesel-electric, whereby the pistons turn a generator, producing electricity. In simplified terms, they are quieter, produce less vibration, and do not have to surface, making them very stealthy.
In the case of Ukrainian drones, we are all by now very familiar with the low-cost and mass-produced unmanned weapons-of-war being used so effectively by Ukraine against Russia.
Related: Marines turn H-1 helicopters into drone motherships
In fact, the entire world is now familiar with this new method of warfare, also being employed in Iran, and no doubt soon, wherever wars are fought. In fact, that is the point: The U.S. military knows that these technologies are changing warfare, and thus it is a good thing when we invite forces using such tech to effectively come and wipe the floor with us in an exercise.
While such a defeat – even in a training environment – can at first blush seem demoralizing and even dangerous as it illustrates a weakness on the part of our forces, in reality, it is the only way to adequately identify gaps and work to overcome them.
After its performance in 2005, for example, the Swedish Navy was asked to loan a Gotland class sub to the U.S. Navy for further study.
That is what we should want: the desire to identify weaknesses, then work to overcome them.
It is certain as well that the U.S. military is learning many lessons from the Ukrainians in drone warfare. We should all endorse that here in the United States. It does not make a good-ole-fashioned butt whooping any easier to digest, but it does make the U.S. military stronger in the end. Keep those hard lessons coming, I say.
Feature Image: A Marine with Marine Corps Attack Drone Team demonstration during an exercise. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Connor Taggart)
Read more from Sandboxx News
- Why 11.5 is the best AR barrel length for most shooters
- Longest-range air-to-air missile in the world has been revealed – and it belongs to the U.S. Navy
- Why low-cost missiles alone shouldn’t be the future of America’s missile arsenal
- End of an era: Marines conducted final operational deployment of Assault Amphibious Vehicles
- A-10 Thunderbolt might be paired with AI and modern tech thanks to recent legislation