Kai L. Youngren
The blood-soaked battlefields of Ukraine combine timeless operational principles— speed, surprise, and combined arms maneuver—with new technology, like drones, electronic warfare, and AI. Yet, more striking than the change in the character of war is the pace at which it is changing. In such a dynamic environment, one principle remains firm: Those who adapt, win.
There is no single step the US Army can take to meet this adaptation imperative. But one that it can begin to take now, and that would have a disproportionate impact, is to embed small, collaborative workshop cells— teams of industry engineers and military subject matter experts—within frontline units and training centers. These teams would enable the rapid iteration of low-cost unmanned systems (UxS) and counter–unmanned systems (cUxS), ensuring that battlefield feedback shapes design in real time. Inspired by Ukraine’s success in accelerating UxS innovation, this approach offers a practical path to make the Army more adaptable, agile, and lethal.
The Problem
The UxS and cUxS fight in Ukraine vividly illustrates the speed of battlefield evolution. What began as operational intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets, drones have become more agile—utilized for mass fires, precision strikes, mine-laying, cUxS, and more. The versality has been driven by the fielding of increasingly inexpensive commercial FPV and one-way attack drones. As both belligerents developed cUxS measures, like electronic warfare jamming and interceptor drones, UxS operators have had to rapidly modify their systems to remain operationally effective. Adaptations include larger frames, quieter engines, AI targeting systems, and fiber-optic control cables. This continuous adaptation reflects what Zachary Kallenborn and Marcel Plichta call the “counter-counterdrone” dynamic—a multilayered cycle of technological escalation that makes iteration speed decisive. According to a UK Ministry of Defence official, this grinding process produces new UxS capabilities every two to three weeks, highlighting the necessity of constant technological adaptation to maintain superiority. This tit-for-tat arms race is not only shaping the future of warfare—it is revealing that the US defense industrial base is too slow, expensive, and inflexible to cope with the rapid battlefield change. To remain competitive, procurement must move as fast as the fight and institutions must reward adaptation, not perfection.
No comments:
Post a Comment