Wenn ich mir Ukr-Videos ansehe, in denen die Ukraine Russen in die Luft jagt, erstaunt es mich, wie weit sie in jeder Hinsicht mit diesen FPV-Drohnen gekommen sind.
Noch vor vier Jahren wurden Granaten mit Lichtschalterkabeln an DJI-Drohnen verbunden. Der Aufprall war eine leichte Rauchwolke.
Jetzt können die Russen nicht mehr aus ihrer Deckung fliehen, ohne bei jedem Aufprall buchstäblich in Stücke gerissen zu werden.
Aber sieht die Welt wirklich, wie Drohnen die zweitgrößte Armee der Welt zerstört haben, sobald ein Land mit dem technischen Hintergrund der Ukraine in sie investiert hat?
- Drohnen werden den Angriff auf kleinere Länder für größere Nationen wie die USA äußerst riskant machen. Ich bin überrascht, dass wir keine FPV-Aufnahmen von US-Soldaten im Iran gesehen haben. Aber wenn es angegriffen würde, würde es sehr bald auftauchen.
Diese Drohnen übertreffen alles, was es auf einem modernen Schlachtfeld gibt, mit Ausnahme von Schnellflugzeugen mit Düsentriebwerk.
Es ist unwahrscheinlich, dass die USA zu diesem Zeitpunkt viel besser abschneiden als Russland. FPVs bekämpfen Panzer, Helis, APCs, natürlich Soldaten, langsamere Flugzeuge, die AC130-Kanonenschiffe usw.
Sie verschieben das gesamte Schlachtfeld zum Vorteil der Verteidiger und verändern die Art und Weise, wie Kriege geführt werden.
Ich würde sagen, dass sie eine unmittelbare Wirkung haben werden, die so groß ist wie Maschinengewehre oder die Flucht.
Warum spricht niemand über das Ausmaß von Drohnen? Ja, einige sind es… aber sie liegen immer noch sehr weit zurück
https://www.npr.org/2026/03/18/nx-s1-5749400/how-drones-are-reshaping-modern-warfare-around-the-globe
22 Kommentare
Do you think drones are invulnerable to future electronic warfare methods?
I feel like drones are being overhyped a bit. I am not saying they are not incredible tools but the way people talk about drones is as if they are little to no counter to them or that that people won’t think of them in the future, and that they will replace just about every thing in a military’s arsenal if they want to stay competitive.
It is a powerful tool but not some war panacea
Most people I know who stay informed on the topic are plenty aware of how drones have been changing everything lol
The average person who doesn’t take an interest & barely even knows people in the military? Yeah they’re not gonna know or really care. lol
I agree, OP, it’s being massively discounted. Drones are going to be as big as the tank was for some time.
Soon as the anti drone weapons come nort as much. It will level out.
Drones have definitely changed the battlefield strategy, but air power is still the dominant force in any battle. Thanks to western air defences, Russia can’t control the skies over Ukraine. Which is why the war is a stalemate on the ground. If either side had air dominance, the war would be over by now.
Literally every military in the world.
Two nuclear-powered US Navy carriers remain deployed in the ME region
We know it’s coming, what is the problem is many people see it coming but can’t invest in companies like Anduril.
So yes it’s coming but mine as well profit from it. Then use the money to build a bunker and hide
What would ukraine rather have, the most powerful drone force in the world or the most powerful airforce? I think it would be the latter
Uh, the US would not do much better? Not so. Well I guess you did not know the U.S. army sends units to war games at Ft. Irwin for wargames and in which the training unit is attacked with drone swarms as part of it. This has been going on for more than two years. If you search you can find news articles talking about it. You forget the U.S. has airpower that Russia does not, this makes the battlefield very different. Should a war kick off with the U.S. involved the first thing blown up will be drone factories, drone storage, drone transport and drone teams trying to launch while meanwhile launching drones at them. Any drones getting through would be hit with interceptors. This is not just a hypothetical either. The U.S. when dealing with the Houthi’s in the Red Sea had air, sea and underwater drones launched at them along with cruise and ballistic missiles. No ships were hit. The U.S. is quite prepared for drone warfare. After all the U.S. has been using drones for some 20 years now. People seem to forget this. Can drones kill some soldiers? Of course but so can an artillery shell, a bomb etc. It is just another weapon and while it changes war some it doesn’t change it drastically. Tactics are adjusted, new defensive weapons are made or purchased. And those training exercises help inform what is needed. If it is not already availalable they put out a request for a defensive weapon with needed capabilities. And this has already happened. New weapons for drone defense have already been added and others are being developed and tested. Sometimes they are tested in Ukraine to see how they perform for real battle tests.
I am not sure where reddit gets this idea that drones change warfare as we know it. It may for poorer quality militaries like Russia. But NATO countries are a whole different level of modern military. Russia is a lower tier. Any new weapons changes tactics and modern militaries adjust and already have. And at Ft. Irwin they talked about the tactics changes they adopted to deal with drones. And by the way at Ft. Irwin they go even further, the have a fake internet in the wargame and have local civilians (actors of course) putting on social media the location of blue team positions and things like that. But also the civies in the red team area are also doing that. So the soldiers also learn about war in the age of social media. Learn about their positions being exposed on social media but also where the enemy is so they can target them. I have been through a wargame at Ft. Irwin, their red team is very very good at what they do and put the army units (blue teams) through a tough exercise. Your not helping them learn and adapt if you go easy and they don’t.
At this particular moment, sure.
All the best minds in every military worldwide are pretty much singularily focused on counter-drone doctrine and technology. So at some point the balance will flip, as it always does with any new military innovation.
Drones are an evolution of precision guided warfare. Simply, it has been miniaturized to the squad level and elevated to tactical and strategic classes of weaponry. Drones will be a force multiplier at a squad level and provide a tactical advantage to any army that can utilize the real-time data. Drones are also cheaper to produce and to lose compared to human trained, and/or piloted war platforms. Combine it with autonomous AI and you have a material advantage. It because even more interesting once AGI becomes a reality. Muhahaha
I think it’s a very interesting topic, honestly. For once, the price of a new technology is not orders of magnitude greater than the last technology. We’re not creating ship based rail guns anymore. For the price of one system, you can get loads of drones. And now that drones are suddenly an option (and an option with lots of ability to „try it and find out“) so are the possibilities for „Drone+ X.“ Drone plus grenade payload dropped from just 50 yards above the target? Yup. Drone with napalm flamethrower? Yup. Drone made to intercept larger drones? Yep.
I would love if some writer started working on a drone based „Hunt for Red October.“ I learned a ton about submarines from that book.
We need to hold fast on jumping on top of ‚drone hype‘
Firstly, drones (in their current state) have serious issues.
First, and most obviously, whilst drones are a very old bit of kit. Their modern usage in LSCO environments (i.e. Ukraine) is changing & evolving rapidly. The tactics & kit which works today, may well not work in a years time. And drones themselves or the way they’re used may change entirely in 5 years time. Paired with this, counter-drone technology is changing & evolving at an equally rapid rate. We need to stand **very** clear of any ideas of ‚We no longer need X, because a drone can do it!“ – we don’t know what counter-drone technology will look like in a decades time. Stay far clear of ideas that conventional platforms (e.g. Tanks) are useless or unnecessary because of drones.
Secondly, drones have fundamental limitations. Drones are not as fast, stealthy or carry as much of a boom as modern aircraft. Drones are, themselves, incredibly vulnerable and **have** to be produced at quantity, not quality. If you, as many western militaries do, keep chucking on gucci-kit, you’ll find yourself losing the war of economics anyway because buckshot or a net will stop your drone. Drones could drop grenades in a hatch, they can’t destroy a bridge. At least not as easily as an F35.
I also want to challenge your assertion that they ‚counter tanks, helis, apcs, slower planes‘. Yes, the physical ability to counter doesn’t necessarily mean they are the *best* or even an *effective* counter. For example: drones aren’t very good at countering tanks. They can score a mobility kill, but unless you’re leaving hatches open (which western tank crews definitely won’t be doing near the battlefield), you aren’t killing a tank. Even after a mobility kill, you’ll require **a lot** of conventional weapons like artillery or ATGMs to actually kill the thing. Helicopter & slower planes are, as well, still better & more effectively countered by dedicated anti-air nets.
When it comes to the oceans, they are entirely untested in rougher oceans. Being used only in the (comparatively) calm Black Sea against a naval power who isn’t known to be the best with equipment maintenance.
Drones are, without any shadow of a doubt, a very impactful element of warfare. But it’s far too soon to say whether they’ll be an evolution or a revolution. Especially when it’s only been used in 1 very specific conflict, with very specific sets of circumstances. In the event of a broader European war with Russia, the war will likely look very different from Ukraine. Drones will definitely change how ISTAR operates and one-way attack drones will become more popular. And it’ll certainly change how wars are fought in other areas of the world.
I just want us to take a breath and avoid jumping on drone hype. Keep investing in regular weapon platforms until it begins to mature, so we know exactly what we’re dealing with.
imagine ukraine has no anti aircraft missles or units or javelins.
next thing what would happen if the attacking country was nato.
Apache Heli
A10 Warthog
AC-130
F35s, F16s
All bombarding every line of defence that ukraine has.
Drones are magnific against scattered infantry, but AC 130 is even better.
Then the tanks+infantry would come and occupy the land easily, while the air superiority is kept up front of the tanks and infantry by 100-200km.
Ukraine situation is kept by anti aircraft missles and the lack of on field intellignece information on russian army.
Then the attack and main defence is sustained by their use of drones.
But eliminate anti aircraft capabilities and ukraine falls.
But to answer to your question, if a country attacks a small country, they need to make sure they can project air superiority. If that fails, they will end up in an attrition war against a small defending country that will spam drones like mad.
The US has been busy developing a host of counter-drone systems (C-UAS) including advanced radar, jamming, spoofing, network attacks, kinetic weapons, directed energy weapons, defensive drones, machine learning jt learns about different classes of drones and their tactics with each sortie etc etc in packages ranging from ground drones small enough to patrol with troops to systems substantially bigger than a HIMARS.
Can our aircraft carriers defend against 1000 drones coming at it? 2000?
OP is implying that Russia doesn’t use drones, only Ukraine does? Why?
An FPV drone is a cheap extended range ATGM. They’re effective on the battlefield but don’t particularly change the balance of a strategic fight.
I’m genuinely more afraid the impact it has on terrorism, cos these are cheap and readily available offensive vectors while there are no sustainable defense mechanisms developed yet
You are grossly over simplify this.
You cannot compare US vs Russian tactics, both of the nations do not fight the same, nor have the same tactics or the same capabilities.
Drones are a tool, that work well under certain conditions. The conditions being a stale front line that is heavy shaped by artillery, making the front line a large “great area”. That is sparely manned with small scale inflation tatics . (Limited shorad protection). Which would be effective for insurgency operations.
various experts, say it take 9/10 drones to take out a tank, so not quick to stop a coordinated attack. Nor the range to affect deep into supply lines.