How is this dissimilar to the Ukrainian "Spider Web" attack on the Russian TU-22M and TU-95 aircraft?
War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
11–20 of 106 posts
Re: War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
#12Feels like the title needs some sort of "2002" notice - the reporting is recent but the actual wargame was done in 2002 and only recently declassified. So, of course, the US military's vulnerability has only increased in spades since 2002 due to drones. All those bases in the Middle East that were supposed to help protect the countries where they were based were just ripe targets. I think more critically, most of the…
It is about force projection though. Ok, you have a bunch of drones in the US, now how do you use them to attack Iran or in the pacific theatre?
Yes, aircraft carriers aren't nearly as unstoppable as they were in WWII, but they are still the most versatile mobile platforms the world has for projecting force around the globe.
Re: War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
#13How is this dissimilar to the Ukrainian "Spider Web" attack on the Russian TU-22M and TU-95 aircraft? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb
Iran doesn't have real-time spy satellites and Starlink. it can only launch their shitty shaheds at stationary targets in impotent rage like Russia does.
Re: War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
#14This war game has been discussed many times. One thing to consider is that Van Riper summoned assets unrealistically he used small boats to avoid detection but then attributed load outs that they couldn't realistically carry. He also moved information unrealistically assuming that his units could communicate as efficently with paper moved by hand as they could with radios. There are real, valid criticisms of the less…
IKR? "from a 2002 war game" Have there really been no other more interesting war games in the last quarter-century, or did all the negative attention this got just result in us never hearing about another one?
There have been far more interesting war games in the last quarter century.[0]
This one shows the the US narrowly winning against China in a conflict over Taiwan. The US wins but with tremendous losses -- specifically in the form many munitions that take years to decades to replace.
And it just so happens that we witnessed a conflict play out just a few months ago and that resulted in a similar depletion of munitions albeit with minimal losses of American ships and aircraft.
What's very troubling about this is that in response the US moved munitions from the pacific into the middle east, leaving Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan in a very vulnerable position.
This may explain why the current US president was unusually obsequious to the leader of China when in the past he had been particularly bellicose.
Also, cool fact: While researching this subject I learned that the engines for most American cruise missiles come from a single company.[1]
[0] https://chinaselectcommittee.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/se...
Re: War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
#15Feels like the title needs some sort of "2002" notice - the reporting is recent but the actual wargame was done in 2002 and only recently declassified. So, of course, the US military's vulnerability has only increased in spades since 2002 due to drones. All those bases in the Middle East that were supposed to help protect the countries where they were based were just ripe targets. I think more critically, most of the…
A Shahed is only useful against stationary soft targets, which an aircraft carrier is not. It also doesn’t have the kind of heavy warhead or terminal guidance required to defeat the armored structure of naval ships. Shahed doesn’t have any kind of countermeasure avoidance. Adding these would massively increase the cost.
Naval anti-ship drones have been around for many decades. This is a highly evolved area of military technology with a long history of real-world engagements upon which to base design choices.
The standard naval anti-ship drones are Harpoon, Exocet, and similar. These are qualitatively more capable than a Shahed and you still need a swarm of them to get through.
Re: War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
#16Feels like the title needs some sort of "2002" notice - the reporting is recent but the actual wargame was done in 2002 and only recently declassified. So, of course, the US military's vulnerability has only increased in spades since 2002 due to drones. All those bases in the Middle East that were supposed to help protect the countries where they were based were just ripe targets. I think more critically, most of the…
I'm not sure a carrier strike group would actually outright lose to a giant swarm of drones, at least in terms of the carrier being sunk. A Shahed warhead is pretty small once you're using it against large warships.
That said, I wonder why you don't see Ukraine and Russia doing this more -- "saving up" for massive clouds of long range strike drones every couple weeks, instead of sending out a couple hundred every night. It feels like the latter strategy would be more effective, saturating air defenses and what have you, but it doesn't seem to be used much. Maybe launching that many drones at roughly the same time is really hard?
Re: War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
#17How is this dissimilar to the Ukrainian "Spider Web" attack on the Russian TU-22M and TU-95 aircraft? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb
Iran doesn't have real-time spy satellites and Starlink. it can only launch their shitty shaheds at stationary targets in impotent rage like Russia does.
It’s ok to be patriotic, but underestimating your enemy could be foolish or even fatal.
https://www.google.com/search?q=iran+launched+spy+satellite+...
Re: War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
#18Feels like the title needs some sort of "2002" notice - the reporting is recent but the actual wargame was done in 2002 and only recently declassified. So, of course, the US military's vulnerability has only increased in spades since 2002 due to drones. All those bases in the Middle East that were supposed to help protect the countries where they were based were just ripe targets. I think more critically, most of the…
[dead]
Re: War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
#19Even high tech drone and DF missiles also America will 100% lose. Why? No rare earth and magnets. Consistently dreaming of past glories like fighting Japanese in Midway and fighting Saddam. Remember USA lost to goat herders. I am 100% sure those Talebans have no J10C or Oreshnik missiles.
Re: War game exposed U.S. vulnerability to low-tech warfare
#20How is this dissimilar to the Ukrainian "Spider Web" attack on the Russian TU-22M and TU-95 aircraft? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb
I keep wondering if this is a preview of the future. If I were a nation state looking to initiate hostilities, how "easy" it would be to have a handful of kamikaze drones discretely built and distributed around juicy targets.
Radar, AA, expensive jets, core infrastructure. All attacked as part of an opening salvo which could cripple the enemy's forces on the first day.