Along with Israel’s much-discussed knowledge loss, there is growing awareness that many of the high-tech weapons produced by the United States and Israel don’t live up to expectations. & nbsp, Many European systems operate in a similar manner.
For instance, we were informed that the German Leopards and the Abrams tanks were far better to Russian tanks and may transform the Ukrainian battlefield. The Ukrainians understand and have publicly stated that if those vehicles are used, they will be destroyed, so much, the Abrams tanks have not been sent into war.
The Leopard vehicles were also intended to be a game-changer. However, Russian guns, uavs, and mines have destroyed the tanks despite their excellent electronics and targeting systems, cutting-edge weapons and excellent gasoline power plant.
The Europeans’ interest in a new tank to remove the Leopard and French Leclerc tank may come as no little surprise, especially the Germans, French, Spanish, and Italians. However, the concept of this cylinder predates Ukraine and needs to be updated. In any case, if a new tank is actually built, it will take between ten and fifteen years to complete.
Unfortunately, at the same time that Israeli intelligence failed in its mission, we don’t know if that failure was technological or analytical. In Israel, the highly successful Iron Dome air defense system & nbsp was swamped by thousands of Hamas missiles and unable to protect civilians from missile damage.
What we do know is that Hamas was able to breach Israel’s sophisticated fence system on the Gaza border and launch a massive land invasion while also launching airborne attacks( missiles, drone, & nbsp, paragliders) and seaborne assaults( go-fast boats ).
Additionally, there is a statement claiming that Iron Dome’s communications and nbsp IP addresses were compromised. The revelation of Iron Dome’s Internet addresses could result in the system being blocked or diverted, but this record has not been verified and may never be. & nbsp,
The issue of security affects command and control systems in the US, Europe, and Israel. & nbsp, Because the Russians have created a variety of jamming systems, there have been significant issues with Western hardware in Ukraine.
A picture of the Stinger missile’s issue is available. Stingers gained notoriety in the middle of the 1980s when the US gave them to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, where the transportable one-man air defense weapon was used to destroy low-flying Russian aircraft gunships, transportation aircraft, and fighters. The Russians lacked efficient defenses. & nbsp,
More than 1,400 Stinger missiles, both from battle stocks, have been sent by the US to Ukraine. The 250 Stingers were suddenly delivered in May of last year after Taiwan’s order for them was delayed from 2019 to 2023. & nbsp,
The US no longer produces innovative Stingers; instead, it only renovates existing ones. The US Army has today announced a plan to launch an” faster and more survivable” Stinger weapon. RTX and Lockheed Martin, two protection companies, are preparing to face off against one another to create the Stinger’s replacement. & nbsp, However, the project has come to a halt because there is currently no funding available.
The Army estimates that it will take five years to create the fresh Stinger. & nbsp, Then the missiles will need to be produced, which will take an additional two to four years. & nbsp, In reality, it means that the US will only have a small number of outdated Stinger missiles because the majority of them have been sold to foreign buyers, particularly Ukraine.
The Army has discovered that Russian blocking systems have exposed older Stingers, which is also noteworthy. Additionally, The Army is aware that Choppers are not very effective against drones, which lowers expectations that they will be a match for extremely potent armor-killing aircraft like Russia’s Lancet. & nbsp,
The Ukraine War appears to have taught the Army a valuable lessons, but it is still taking some time to develop an option. & nbsp,
Additionally, it significantly complicates the standard platform by giving the potential Stinger a ability against drones. Additionally, the Army has not thought about using a man-portable anti-drone weapon and an aeroplane weapon separately.
The Army has also decided that it will try to design a” new” Abrams, known as the M1E3, rather than upgrading the existing Abrahms tanks that are already in stock— a project it has already started calling & nbsp, SEPv4.
The Army wants to make the M1E3 a ground-up style that is lighter and better protected, particularly from behind attacks from enemy planes and robots. & nbsp, It has long been understood that tanks are more vulnerable from above due to a lack of armor protection.
Instead of continuing with the Jewish Trophy Active Defense System, which now provides 360-degree protection, the Army wants to build in effective protection. & nbsp, The Army claims that Trophy is too heavy given the tank’s enormous weight even without Trophy installed. Without team, ammunition, or add-on systems, the Abrams container currently weighs 70 tons.
With some of the Leopards and British Challengers stuck in mud and smooth surface, Ukraine has shown that large heavy vehicles have significant running issues there. Additionally, ultra-heavy tanks immediately tear up roads and clear tank tracks.
The Army’s ability to produce the M1E3 Abrams container is unknown. The plan is no finalized, and it might not be feasible.
A specific issue coming out of Ukraine is the risk of mine. The Russians have flooded areas and roads with air-launched mine. It is challenging to clear them, and the Russians have consistently destroyed mine-clearing tools provided by the US and NATO.
The Russians have also improved their mine-clearing collection costs in the interim. Forbes claims that the MICLIC system is a” rocket-propelled, rope-like explosive.” The series charge is carried across the minefield by the rocket as it is propelled into the air. The plan is for the ensuing burst to set off any underground mines, rapidly clearing a path.
World War II saw the development of MICLIC methods, and Canada produced the Snake and Conger, two-man compact models. The British created Giant Viper, a much more extensive structure, in the 1950s.
The M58 is the latest US system. Ukraine has received it, but few, if any, of them have been observed on the field. & nbsp, For transportation, it needs a truck or an armored vehicle.
US armoured cars, particularly the Bradley, have performed poorly in Ukraine, much like tank. Similar to the German Marder, France’s AMX – 10C, and other armored personnel carriers, Russian artillery, mining, helicopters outfitted with anti-tank and nbsp, as well as missiles and drones like the Lancet, have shown to be effective goals. In addition, & nbsp,
There are solutions to defend the topside of armoured vehicles, but there aren’t many options to shield the armor’s bottom.
The US has long been aware that mine were a problem for weapons, whether they were used by an enemy with specialized equipment or even by shady organizations like al Qaeda, the Taliban, and ISIS in Iraq and Afghanistan.
These adversaries employed makeshift explosives( IEDs ). Because they were constructed from larger gun shells and had a triggering system, IEDS were frequently better to little land mines.
Some people used basic car door openers or mobile devices. Others used force plates to set off an explosion. Others, particularly IEDs in populated areas, were hard-wired to a local controller. In addition, & nbsp,
Mine Resistant Ambush Protected ( MRAP ) vehicles were created by the US to transport troops. & nbsp, Mine weight is usually achieved by deflecting violent chargers using a V-Hull style. Big tires, an elevated interruption to lessen blast effects, and domestic blast-resistant seats help to reduce the vehicle’s ability to withstand an IED or mine explosion.
The US-made M1224( and various versions ) MaxxPro MRAP is one method that can be seen on the Ukrainian battlefield. 200 MaxxPros & nbsp have been sent by the US to Ukraine, where they are being used as attack vehicles. The outcomes are almost homicidal. & nbsp,
Oryx claims that as of October, Ukraine had already lost 62 MaxxPros( 47 completely destroyed, 8 damaged, 5 abandoned, and 2 captured ), or more than 30 % of the supplied vehicles. It is unknown if gun, anti-tank weapons, drones, or plane gunships were used to destroy the vehicles. MRAPs are a fairly safe way to transport troops away from the entrance lines, but they are extremely vulnerable otherwise, it is likely to be demonstrated once all the evidence is in. & nbsp,
A MRAP you transport about 10 soldiers and generally has a team of three. In addition, & nbsp,
Effective safety, better weapons and failsafe systems, ranging from mechanical systems like smoke canisters to advanced electro-optical jamming systems can help to mitigate some of the weaknesses of armoured systems. These vulnerabilities can be found in tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, or armor-equipped troop carriers like MRAPs.
One way to make it more difficult for an foe to pin this equipment is to use tanks and armor with small thermal signatures that you run at night without headlights. This would also necessitate the enemy having great night vision equipment connected to their anti-tank weapons.
However, the fact remains that on the current field, armor of all kinds faces significant survival challenges. Whether contemporary armored platforms are still front-line weapons is one of the unanswered & nbsp questions. Unfortunately, there aren’t many great choices.
By moving troops at night and launching attacks from ahead positions at dawn, Ukraine has attempted to penetrate the battlefield with sparse armor. It has occasionally hitched rides on pickup trucks and outdated vehicles. Ukraine has paid a very high price for using what amounts to an updated human wave attack, according to & nbsp. & nbsp,
Similar issues recently surfaced in Israel, where the opponent invaded enemy territory with only mild weapons, forcing the Jewish defenders to engage in combat with guns and rifles. Heavy equipment was not of much use, & nbsp. Israel suffered numerous civil and military deaths.
Americans should be aware that even if all the money in the world is immediately available and all developing potential is entirely functional, replacing lost tools, teaching lessons, or developing new solutions can take period— in reality years. & nbsp, However, the alternative — moving forward without making any changes— is even worse.
The US Army and, most likely, its NATO allies are now realizing that the NATO alliance & nbsp’s approach to warfighting needs to change immediately. This was evident well before the Ukraine War because calculations revealed some of the key issues.
Israel must change its doctrines andnbsp in order to accurately account for the new threats it faces once it has overcome the quick crisis or even during this problems.
It is abundantly clear that the entire strategy, as well as the theory and capabilities of warfighting, need to be updated, revised, and, in some cases, eliminated.
Stephen Bryen, who oversaw the Near East Subcommittee of the
As a lieutenant director of security, the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and nbsp
is currently a senior fellow at Yorktown Institute and the & nbsp, Center for Security Policy.
His Substack, Weapons, and Strategy was the original subject of this andnbsp’s content. Asia Times is republishing it with their consent, nbsp.