When it comes to tech, the conflict in Ukraine is a battle of allusions. On the one hand, this is the first major conflict in which a variety of unmanned aerial vehicles ( UAVs ) or drones have taken such a prominent place.
On the other hand, this brand-new technology has significantly contributed to forcing troops to dig trenches that are reminiscent of the First and Second World Wars.
Some of the technology used in the Ukrainian conflict, such as the guided missiles being used by both sides, is n’t all that new in its core. Modern guided weapons have their roots in early improvements in the Second World War.
Modern precision-guided weapons may be getting more precise at hitting their targets, but it’s all too frequently a case of significant human error when tying their targets.
What is unique about the conflict in Ukraine is that it differs from many of the” small wars” of the late 20th and early 21st centuries, in which one side had an almost overwhelming technological advantage.
The Taliban in Afghanistan did n’t have access to satellite scanning, big drones and perfection- guided weapons, or even arms to store these, so they had to fight an “unconventional” or “asymmetrical” battle.
In the battle in Ukraine, both sides have access to and are developing innovative and never- so- innovative technologies, with neither side having an overall technological edge.
Drones and war
Big robots have been used in conflicts for a number of years. In Afghanistan, the United States made significant use of huge drones like the Harvester, both for surveillance and targeted killings. When Russia’s forces were assisting the Assad government in Syria, it used massive drones for surveillance.
The use of drones in the Ukraine war is unique because of their large number and range. Large robots are still being used, including Iranian-developed” death” or “kamikaze” robots like the Shahed, which can reach targets deeply inside army place. However, smaller robots are being used by both edges — usually nearer to the front — for surveillance, artillery spotting and as torpedo drones.
The Russian area had a competitive advantage in drone warfare at the start of the conflict, and it is possible that Russia has since lost that advantage. Russian drone manufacturers have a large number of them imported, and they have developed some successful local measures against Ukrainian drones.
Russian naval robots have, nevertheless, been a special issue for the Russian army.
A prime example of this is the new use of marine drones to sink the large patrol ship Sergei Kotov. Modern ships are no bribing with the anti-aircraft weapons that their Second World War peers, for instance, used to prevent bomber aircraft.
But it’s possible that they will quickly start to sputter because they are best suited to handle drones close to the eye. Yet the flimsy bomb internet from the late 19th century may make a comeback in an effort to prevent drones from reaching ships at outlet.
Missile tech
While in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US and other European power made heavy use of guided missiles. Both factors have access to them, which makes it unique in Ukraine.
For instance, the Russian Iskander and Anglo-French Storm Shadow weapons have proved to be very effective at striking target deep in the enemy’s back. For weapons frequently have been spotted using drones as their targets.
Some tanks are being destroyed by drones, anti-tank missiles like the Russian Kornet, or the much-deprecated US-supplied Javelin on the Polish side, not to mention being destroyed by them.
Anti-tank weapons are not new; for instance, the Iranian armed forces made great use of late developed Russian anti-tank missiles during the Yom Kippur War in 1973.
The anti-tank missiles being used today in Ukraine are, however, much more sophisticated. Anti-tank missiles were frequently required to be connected to the operator through a fine wire that the missile pulled out as it flew back in 1973! Today’s missiles typically have more sophisticated and reliable targeting.
New and old technologies
Both sides use drones frequently for reconnaissance, such as to target conventional artillery or guiding infantry.
Despite the advancement of new technology, there are still many elements that soldiers from the First World War would understand.
Firstly, regardless of all the technology, ultimately the “poor bloody infantry” has to move in and occupy territory — and fight for it at close quarters. Soldiers are still frequently forced to kill other soldiers when they are close to one another.
Typically, the technology of today may be new, but the function is n’t. For instance, we might see drones acting similar to the First World War’s observation balloons. These were specifically employed for directing artillery fire.
Balloons were discontinued in conflicts because of the development of high-powered anti-aircraft guns that were able to easily shoot them down.
The race begins to counteract it when a new technology is developed. The Russian military has already succeeded in preventing drone operators from contacting their drones.
In the constant technological battle, what is next? Although autonomous drones that use artificial intelligence are in many ways a nightmare, they are being developed. Unmanned, autonomous anti-drone drones would undoubtedly follow.
One thing is certain — new technologies will be developed, to be followed by countermeasures. New high-tech methods of killing or facilitating it will continue to be used in place of the old methods.
Alexander Hill, Professor of Military History, University of Calgary
The Conversation has republished this article under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.