Drones have been portrayed as the end of the Russian-Ukrainian War, but new advances in laser weapon technology demonstrated by a new UK laser weapon test may maintain tanks on the frontlines of future battles.
Defense News studies that British Army soldiers tested a cutting-edge light tool mounted on a Wolfhound armored personnel carrier this month. Difficulty robots were effectively destroyed by the weapons at Radnor Range in Wales.
The 16th Regiment Royal Artillery, which is a specialist in weather protection, was involved in the tests, according to Defense News, which were part of the UK Ministry of Defense’s Land Laser Directed Energy Weapon Demonstrator system.
This initiative is cited in the report because it addresses the growing risk of unmanned aerial systems, especially in the Russo-Ukrainian War, where robots are frequently used.
The statement quotes Stephen Waller, directed-energy arms team leader in the commission’s Defense Equipment &, Support business, emphasizing the need for cost-effective options to protect forces. It notes that the light tool, developed in collaboration with Raytheon UK under a GBP16.8 million ( US$ 21 million ) deal, offers a virtually limitless weapons source, making it a potentially more affordable choice than traditional measures.
The laser tool has almost unlimited ammunition, making it a potentially more affordable option than conventional countermeasures.
Defense News notes that the ministry is currently evaluating additional development requirements as a result of the effective trials, which represent a significant step in the direction of operational deployment. According to the report, similar attempts by the US and France highlight a global trend toward developed laser-based protection systems to combat the growing drone threat.
The Russo-Ukrainian War has established little, inconsequential drones as an efficient mainstream anti-armor tool. The fight has sparked the development of improvised countermeasures, which have rekindled debates about the value of tanks in contemporary war.
One such protection that was hastily improvised in the early days of the war is” Cope cages.” In a review from April 2024, Julien Potin mentions deal cages, improvised metallic grilles mounted atop container turrets, as a well-known but contentious addition to modern warfare.
Potin notes that they originate from the need to counter top-attack threats, aiming to pre-detonate warheads from anti-tank guided missiles ( ATGM ), rocket-propelled grenades ( RPG) and drone-dropped explosives– but their effectiveness is hotly debated.
He says proponents argue that cope cages offer low-cost, easily installed protection, especially against drone-dropped improvised explosive devices ( IEDs ), noting that their ongoing use by Russian, Ukrainian and Israeli forces, alongside production-line versions displayed at military expos, are indications of growing institutional acceptance.
But, he points out that critics claim that cope cages are inadequate against sophisticated ATGMs like the Javelin. He adds that the taller tanks make them more obvious to the army makes because of their increased level. They even impede team activity and leave, while restricting access to top-mounted arms.  ,
So-called “turtle tank” force the cope cage concept more. A structure like this one covers the best, sides, and back of the tank.
Oliver Parken mentions that the turtle ship’s additional gear considerably blocks the captain’s vision and the main car’s passage in a May 2024 post for the War Zone.
Parken information that the turtle ship’s gear properly counters rocket-propelled grenades and gentle anti-armor weapons yet leaves gaps prone to precision-guided munitions. Although the frog ship’s heavy weapons offers a lot of security, its sluggish speed makes it a top target for drones, and its less maneuverability and situational awareness pose significant functional challenges.
Both sides have begun equipping their tanks with vehicle-mounted jammers as skilled operators can accurately action drones into the gaps of cope cages and turtle pond improvised gear.
Tom Porter makes the claim in a February 2024 Business Insider article that while Russian jamming capabilities are better than those of Ukraine, they are not distributed equally across the front lines. Unprotected vehicles, according to Porter, can be a weak link.
Among other solutions on offer, fiber-optic drones are immune to jamming and radiolocation, with their control signals sent via a cable akin to wire-guided ATGMs. However, the length of their fiber-optic control cables restricts their range, which may pose a risk to their operators. Control cables can also get tangled or damaged.
In a 2023 article for Military Review, Curtis Buzzard and other authors make reference to the renewed debates over the relevance of the tank in contemporary warfare, arguing that tank supporters claim that they can use essential firepower, mobility, and survivability to form combined arms teams, enabling breakthrough operations, and projecting national power, as seen in the Invasion of Iraq and the 1967 Six-Day War.
However, Buzzard and others point out that critics highlight tanks ‘ vulnerabilities to ATGMs, drones and loitering munitions, as demonstrated by heavy Russian tank losses in Ukraine. Additionally, they criticize tanks for their logistical demands and for their large electromagnetic signatures, which make them detectable.
While critics may call the tank obsolete, Buzzard and others argue that tanks remain crucial but must evolve through integration, concealment, and enhanced mobility to meet future threats.
Advancements in laser weapon technology may soon make them a viable drone defense for armored fighting vehicles, even though improvised solutions like cope cages, turtle tanks, and vehicle-mounted jammers have varying degrees of effectiveness against rapidly evolving drone warfare capabilities.
In an October 2024 article for the Wall Street Journal ( WSJ), Alistair MacDonald cautions that, despite their promise, laser weapons face significant limitations, including high energy requirements, limited range and susceptibility to adverse weather conditions.
According to MacDonald, these limitations prevent lasers from performing well in dynamic combat situations because they struggle to maintain focus and power over long ranges and during atmospheric disturbances.
Additionally, he claims that the bulkiness of the required cooling and power supplies makes it harder for them to be deployed on mobile devices.
However, MacDonald says technological advancements have made vehicle-mounted counter-drone lasers more feasible. He mentions that fiber lasers increase efficiency and compactness by combining light from several strands into a single, potent beam.
He claims that the incorporation of high-energy lasers onto vehicles like the US Army’s Stryker armored fighting vehicle has also been made possible by the development of smaller, stronger power generators and cooling systems.
According to MacDonald, these improvements provide a cost-effective and essentially limitless ammunition supply and allow for quick, precise targeting of drones. He mentions that the successful trials of these systems demonstrate that they have the potential to improve combat capabilities, making a significant advancement in counter-drone technology.