The_Capt

Jon...are you coming onto me?

Gotta be honest. Kind of where my head goes. Big problem with energy density here. A battle suit that basically makes the individual soldier the platform would solve a lot of this. Combined with nano-tech it would mean that an individual soldier could carry more combat power further and faster while providing protection. It add the ability to distribute that mass very widely. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powered_exoskeleton But how do you power the damn thing? An exo-suit with armor will have a lot of weight and the only thing with enough energy to power one is fossil fuels, which is really problematic for many reasons. So we would need something that can meet or exceed existing fuel energy density to power these things. This, or one starts looking at human augmentation and/or genetic engineering but if one thinks unmanned is a tempest, just try and dive into that snakepile.

I am not sure. All AFVs tend to be heavy and hot too. I don't think we are ready to shed some sort of heavy direct fire support. My bet is we will likely see unmanned AFVs, while infantry go distributed and light. They will need carriers but more battle wagons than assault vehicles. Top armor is a trade off because you either have to accept more weight or go lighter on other sides. EFP is not HEAT per se, it is a slug of hot metal fired at the vehicle at great speeds. Sort of if HEAT and AP had an angry murderous baby. We spent quite a few pages on why the UAS problem is so difficult. I do not believe APS will save us. Too many small cheap systems to cope with, backed up by good ol fashion flying steel from artillery. So how do we beat such a system? Well no one really knows right now. My best guess is through the better use of a similar system. C4ISR advantage is a must. Data Superiority, Cognitive Superiority, Learning Superiority. Using unmanned systems and PGM to destroy an opponents Denial abilities - collapse the Bubble. And then some sort of hybrid mass that can remain highly distributed but then concentrate rapidly to exploit opportunity. Lastly, someone has to crack the Riddle of Logistics - The Lies of Want vs Tyranny of Need. Forces will need to be a lot more self-sustaining. Zero Tail. Grande Armee of Energy, type of thinking. People are getting all excited about Unmanned and AI but Nanotech is around the corner. And I am not talking Grey Goo. I am talking manufacturing nano-additives to fuel and explosives. Not to mention energy storage. Complicated indeed.

I think yes but it is at the upper end of what current tac UAS can carry. Can’t find exact weight of sub-munition but likely 5-10 pounds. Right now though it looks like DPICM armed drones are doing just fine. EFP submunitions are wave of the future though. Can’t defeat it with APS or ERA

That was a standoff EFP. Maybe one of these? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMArt_155 Ya, tanks are screwed...calling it. Edit: akd beat me to it.

Dude, good lord. As Steve has signalled we are getting way off track here but if you are going to take a position…how about some proof before we turn all the way into an INCEL echo chamber? Here are counter points that took about 10 seconds to find: https://www.cfr.org/womens-participation-in-global-economy/# https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2022/09/27/sp092722-ggopinath-kgef-gender-korea https://eige.europa.eu/newsroom/economic-benefits-gender-equality?language_content_entity=en As to demographic trend…yeesh been hearing this old song for forty years. People don’t have fewer children because women get jobs. They have fewer children because they can’t afford them. So we are at distribution of wealth. A living wage. Social program and a bunch of issues that basically hold a society together. Immigration (oh let’s light that fuse). And a bunch of other stuff that really drags this thread sideways. Move along now. Nothing to see here.

They do, but rarely for social causes. Social stress and failure is normally a symptom of failure, not a root cause. Really good series here: https://www.youtube.com/@FallofCivilizations And of course Jared Diamonds "Collapse" and others like him do the subject justice. Demographics are also normally a symptom, not a cause.

Sure they are. I have the entire 20th century to prove it. Separation of church and state was well on its way by the end of the 19th century. It is an incredible stretch to see religion paying a central political role in WW1 and WW2, let alone the Cold War. Was it employed to keep the masses fighting? Sure. So was alcohol and nationalism.

"What most people think they are fighting for" Urban 2 was trying to 1) push back Muslim/Arab encroachment and 2) solidify power in Europe. These are not high morale or righteous objectives. God did not will it, we did. And then used God as cover to get thousands to go die somewhere to try and achieve political -not ideological- aims. History is rife with this dynamic. The Church's use of religion to commit genocide is historical fact, but don't dress it up as anything but a political ploy. Same mechanism is happening in Russia right now. But instead of "God", insert whatever Putin is selling.

Right, knew someone was going to pitch those. So take a hard look at those wars and the role religion really played: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Protestantism/Events-under-Charles-I Religion while central, was employed as a wedge or leverage mechanism. Not the primary cause of the war itself, which was almost always about power balance between rulers. Religion was used to light fires under masses to convince them to support one side over the other, not a true objectives of war. There are exceptions, such as the Muslim expansions of the Caliphate era in the 7th century, but cynically these were also about power and resources. Religion tends to be flavoring and energized to make wars happen harder and not core reasons. Even the Crusades have been re-examined: " Crusaders did not only fight for control of the Holy Land; they also worked to secure the Church’s power in Europe. Like the wars against the Muslims, these conflicts were promoted by various popes in Christ’s name and led by crusaders who took vows and received special privileges and indulgences. The “enemies” of the Church in Europe included people who were not Christians. It also included Christians who were labeled heretics, that is, people who challenged the official teachings of the Church or who questioned the pope’s power and authority." https://dcc.newberry.org/?p=14390 So I call BS on most of this to be honest. Northern Ireland: "However, this Northern Irish conflict was not divided on theological lines but instead on those of class and politics, as those who had been so long oppressed were demanding change, equality and freedom. This paper explores the variety of factors which truly influenced the conflict in Northern Ireland and led to the Troubles, shaping what Northern Ireland is today." https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1241&context=younghistorians We can do this all day. Bin Laden wasn't doing it because God told him to. He was looking for some sort of weird Caliphate 2.0 that would put him in power so he could marry Whitney Houston: https://www.reuters.com/article/idUS360594553620120214 In reality macro-social constructs have rarely (if ever) gone to war over a social issue such as religion. They have definitely used it and the impulse of faith is incredibly powerful, but do not believe for a second that secular power dynamics, along with good old fashion human failings such as jealousy, greed and fear, are far more prevalent in causes for war. A really interesting question is whether or not humanity would be better or worse off without religion. Now in micro-social context, especially pre-history, you might have a workable angle here. Smaller groups of people and far deeper spiritual integration into society.

I was going for a more mocking angle to be honest. Since the dawn of time people - usually old people - have somehow hooked whatever social ills they see onto a crisis. “Moral decline”, “Hippies”, “Homosexuality”, “Women who can vote”! Human social systems are naturally a mix of progressiveness and conservatism. And rarely, if ever, does a war start based solely on whatever social issue means most to you. We did not start wars because “the church” since the Crusades, possibly the Middle Ages - and even then there was a whole lotta money and power at play. We sure as hell have never started a war over any of the rest of “damn kids these days” stuff. The West is not going to fall over the obsolescence of religion or LGBTQ issues, or whatever you are worried about. Why? Because it didn’t last time with “women voting”, “civil rights” and “rock and/or roll”. In fact since those End Times, the West has continued it rise in power and wealth. If anything does destroy the West it will be power hungry egomaniacs that leverage all that social angst into something really dangerous. They aren’t doing it because they really care about our church/mosque/raccoon ratios - they are doing it to take more power. The dismantling of democracy, social divisions that turn cancerous, deep corruption and greed- this is how empires die. Not because we decide to stop going to freakin church and start this strange new thing called “meditation”.

And “raccoon stealing”…let’s not forget that. As if raccoons have no agency of their own! Emptying our raccoon churches and filling them with ambiguously self-identifying marmots…wake up sheeple!

I want to retire someplace quiet and dig a deep hole. Watch 80s movies on DVDs off grid. And maybe die in peace before our machine overlords enslave us all.

IDF and Hamas are not symmetrical conventional warfare, which is good news for hybrid warfare and insurgents. Urban hybrid warfare is still unknown with respect to impacts….I guess we will see. If the IDF had 1 million next gen UAS capable of autonomous targeting, backed up by some nightmare Boston Dynamics thing out of Black Mirror I suspect it would be a lot easier to take Gaza. Having swarms and the C4ISR backbone behind them is not necessarily decisive…however, it is undecidable. UAS currently cannot take and hold ground. They have limited range but that is changing. As such they are purpose built for denial. We are seeing massive mutual denial in Ukraine right now and in 10 years this war will look like WW1 era AirPower with respect to technologies such as UAS and PGM…way too much at stake to not chase those. What we have not see is the full potential of swarms on offence. Here they will likely be part of an arms team - lighter infantry and deep fires seem to be the most likely suspects. Corrosive warfare is a theory, and it has limits. Manoeuvre warfare is nearly impossible if one’s opponent has working swarms you cannot counter and a C4ISR backbone behind it. We have seen more than enough examples of why this is. One could go for good ol Attrition warfare, seems to be Russias game. But these new systems are just so damned cheap. Short of Total War and crippling an opposing nations entire industry, it looks like one can swat UAS all day and never run out of targets. PGM are also getting cheaper, as is data. So we basically have a Big Undeciding in warfare. Air Superiority, Maritime Superiority - both metrics of Control vs Denial. Ground warfare was supposed to be the Domain of Decision, but it has become undecidable…until one can break an opponents C4ISR/PGM/Unmanned system while sustaining your own. An Undecision is a powerful thing.

APS ain't doing squat against that.

If one side has swarms that work and other doesn't or a means to deny them, the war is over before it starts. We are talking symmetrical conventional warfare here. Every military in the world will be scrambling in what will become an unmanned arms race. When two similar forces meet under the conditions we see before us Offensive warfare will be stumped. Denial and Defensive will take primacy, they have before. Until someone can solve for c-Swarm. The military term is "persistence", which is different than platform endurance. Endurance is dependent on battery life. Persistence is dependent on the capacity and resilience of the entire system to keep the capability effective and delivering effect. That is bigger than batteries. I can see a future battlespace where UAS are treated like artillery ammo (without barrel wear). Massed precision beats everything. Of course Unmanned are really just the last mile. What is creating major shifts in warfare is C4ISR. Illumination, Integration and Cognition. Even without UAS, these impacts would be significant. With them, along with PGM and we have a new ballgame in front of us.

Don't we kinda already have this? Modern ATGM guidance systems look pretty sophisticated in their ability to stay looked onto one large hunk of metal vs a burning garbage truck. "The tracker is key to guidance/control for an eventual hit. The signals from each of the 4,096 detector elements (64×64 pixel array) in the seeker are passed to the FPA readout integrated circuits which reads then creates a video frame that is sent to the tracker system for processing. By comparing the individual frames, the tracker determines the need to correct so as to keep the missile on target. The tracker must be able to determine which portion of the image represents the target. The target is initially defined by the gunner, who places a configurable frame around it. The tracker then uses algorithms to compare that region of the frame based on image, geometric, and movement data to the new image frames being sent from the seeker, similar to pattern recognition algorithms. At the end of each frame, the reference is updated. The tracker is able to keep track of the target even though the seeker's point of view can change radically in the course of flight. The missile is equipped with four movable tail fins and eight fixed wings at mid-body. To guide the missile, the tracker locates the target in the current frame and compares this position with the aim point. If this position is off center, the tracker computes a correction and passes it to the guidance system, which makes the appropriate adjustments to the four movable tail fins. This is an autopilot. To guide the missile, the system has sensors that check that the fins are positioned as requested. If not, the deviation is sent back to the controller for further adjustment. This is a closed-loop controller."

I have a physics degree and most of this is way above my head. One thing is becoming apparent though - if modern militaries cannot solve for unmanned air war below 2000ft then we are entering into an different era of warfare. Denial and Defence will rule conventional warfare until we can crack the unmanned problem. Military implications for this are enormous, especially considering we have built for Interventions/Offence for the last 30 years at least. Political ramifications of this are not small considering that entry costs for these technologies are low. Well if anyone is looking for a career, this sector will be booming for years.

Gawd. Guns. Neediest bad-girlfriend on the battlefield.

Aw, now I feel bad. It is some sort of swamp beaver, just looked it up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutria

More likely this guy with his tail singed : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobak_marmot Good eating among the hill folk. And you can make a hat out of its fur! Whelp, that’s it. We have officially run out of things to talk about.

It is not worthless I fear, it is bad lessons. People will walk away with a bunch of factoids about mine breaching systems and suddenly are “experts” around the water-cooler. From this they can draw all sorts of really bad conclusions. The biggest reason why mine breaching systems fail is because someone kills them while they are trying to do their job. Watching that video can easily lead someone to think “well send them better kit” - we saw this with the tanks in spades. And then we send them better kit and it still doesn’t work. “Well they must be doing it wrong cause the YouTube guy said…” The entire point of putting up an information piece is to provide people with the knowledge to make better sense of phenomena. For this one needs expertise. We see the death of expertise in modern era. Anyone with a channel can suddenly be an expert in anything. For example, retired SF guys with YouTube channels talking about formation level logistics. They never served in a J4 staff or been trained as a professional logistics officer. But they rub SF “Ranger” patches and suddenly they know what they are talking about. This is just misinformation and in many cases is just chasing likes and subscribes. Problem is that it can easily slide into disinformation and outright fiction. The worst sin are people like Macgregor who know better but keep spreading false info regardless. I do not know what to do about it. I am not a social media expert…but maybe if I did a YouTube channel… I for one can only try to do the best I can in this little forum in outer rings of the information sphere. And on this one backwater thread on a tiny wargaming companies back…we can aspire to do a bit better. The rest of the internet will just have to sort itself out.

Right?! One of the first videos I saw was a Merkava getting taken out Ukrainian style. I expect it will be "low intensity/terrorist" handwaving like when we saw when ISIL do the same thing in Iraq. The military community will likely split up into camps on this whole thing - kinda like we did here. "It is a fad. We have heard it before." "Interesting, but we have counters...please say we have counters." and "Holy Sweet Mother of God! What just happened?" The people in charge tend to come from the first or second camp. The evidence is mounting though. Any professional worth their salt cannot be saying "it will be fine" after watching this war closely.

What a gong show. Some observations: -Density of minefield based on detonations is just nuts. - Mine rollers can sustain about 5-6 hits depending on the mine. They are designed for detection and proving, not clearing...as this tank found out the hard way. - About mid-way you can see them hit an AP mine strip (the small detonations) - Crew panicked and paid for it. One does not slalom through a minefield. One definitely does not turn around and try drive back through it. - Tank is by itself. Seeing more and more of this. Lone tanks rolling through minefields or being brought forward for discrete sniping job. This looks more and more like assault gun work. I expect someone is going to put a direct fire mortar on an IFV to do a better job of it.