US armored brigade took heavy losses against Ukrainian drones in August, Wall Street Journal reported
Army's official military journal publishes analysis of exercise — drone-related casualties drop from 70% to under 30%, two enemy lines breached simultaneously
The Wall Street Journal reported Aug. 13 that Ukrainian drone units inflicted heavy losses on a US armored brigade during the "Combined Resolve" exercise held in Germany.
Although the engagement was simulated, it drew wide attention as a demonstration of drone power in modern warfare.
According to the report, US forces advanced with Abrams tanks and Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, but dust kicked up by the moving vehicles made their positions easy to spot for Ukrainian reconnaissance drones. Bomb-dropping drones and first-person-view drones then moved in, and US vehicles were declared destroyed one after another. Ukraine's 412th Unmanned Systems Unit "Nemesis" participated in the exercise as the opposing force.
So how did US forces respond after suffering those heavy drone-inflicted losses?
An analysis of the exercise has since been published in Military Review, the US Army's official professional military journal. Written by Army officers who took part in the exercise, the piece covers not only the early drone-related casualties but also how US forces adapted and what the final results looked like.
According to the report, roughly 70 percent of the simulated casualties sustained by the 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team "Greywolf" of the 1st Cavalry Division during the first three days of the exercise were caused either by direct drone strikes or by artillery fire directed through drone observation.
As the exercise progressed, however, US forces began changing their approach. They dispersed their units, made aggressive use of terrain and cover, and started relocating quickly after being spotted by enemy drones — moving before incoming rounds could land.
They also deployed electronic warfare equipment to jam enemy drone communications. Some systems achieved jamming effects out to 2 kilometers, though their effectiveness was limited by the need to operate from fixed positions, making it difficult to protect units on the move.
As a result of these tactical adjustments, drone-related casualties as a share of total simulated losses fell to under 30 percent by the end of the third day. In the latter stages of the exercise, US forces also operated more than 700 drones of their own, using them to detect enemy positions and acquire targets for direct strikes and artillery fire.
US forces ultimately succeeded in breaching enemy defensive lines at two points roughly 6 kilometers apart simultaneously. The opposing force failed to identify the main axis of the US attack and could not stop the breakthrough at either location. US forces also destroyed enemy reserves before they could be committed to the fight.
The report emphasized that the enemy had not reduced the intensity of its attacks during the exercise — rather, US forces had changed the way they fought.
That said, not every drone threat was overcome. Fiber-optic guided drones, which are resistant to jamming, remained a particularly difficult challenge. Electronic warfare equipment proved effective at protecting fixed zones, but the exercise confirmed that armored units on the move remain vulnerable to drone attack.
Rather than supporting the conclusion that tanks and armored vehicles have been rendered obsolete by drones, the exercise illustrated the new challenges facing armored forces on a drone-dominated battlefield — and what it will take to fight effectively in one.
anney@heraldcorp.com
