During the First World War, several major inventions appeared on the battlefields, such as, for example, the battle tank. And this, in addition to the improvement of weapons that already existed, whether in the field of aeronautics or in that of artillery. However, these innovations often came from concepts imagined well before the start of the conflict.
That being said, the nature of the combat having evolved, the war of positions having succeeded the war of movement, the belligerents had to adapt. This gave rise to numerous innovations from the grassroots. This trend was encouraged by the French command… Which gave rise to the portable 60 mm pneumatic howitzer with curved fire invented by Edgar Brandt, to the firing system through the arc of the propeller imagined by Lieutenant Roland Garros or again to the “Sauterelle d’Imphy” developed by Captain Élie André Broca, taking inspiration from the crossbow.
In many ways, the war in Ukraine resembles the fighting of 1914-18. This is, in any case, the observation made by General Valery Zalouzhny, the Ukrainian commander-in-chief. “Just like during the First World War, we have reached a technological level which puts us in an impasse,” he recently estimated in the pages of the British weekly The Economist.
Also, to hope to emerge from it, there would need to be a “massive technological leap” because, he said, “this war cannot be won with the weapons of the past generation and outdated methods”. However, for the moment, there is no “game changer”, that is to say a weapon allowing one side or the other to gain the upper hand. Hence continuous efforts to adapt… Which involves innovation in robotics, drones and even electronic warfare. The Ukrainians understood this first… And the Russians are trying to follow, as pointed out by General Pierre Schill, the Chief of Staff of the Army. [CEMAT]in a short analysis of the conflict published on social networks.
“The Ukrainian army has demonstrated indisputable mastery of this area since the start of the conflict, particularly through its capacity for reactive innovation. It is clearly the turn of the Russian army to adapt, with increased capabilities [charge utile et rayon d’action plus importants, mise en œuvre via des drones-relais ou porte-drones, autonomie accrue, IA intégrée…]even if its development seems to be hampered by military bureaucracy,” observed General Schill.
But it is drones that particularly attract CEMAT’s attention. Their “place in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, as well as their consideration by the two belligerents, are emblematic and very instructive as to the ability of an army to adapt to the new conflict,” he writes.
But to the “Russian military bureaucracy” [et la France n’a sans doute pas de leçon à donner en matière…]General Schill obviously prefers the Ukrainian approach, which is undoubtedly reminiscent, relatively speaking, of that which was adopted by the French armies during the First World War.
“Reactive bottom-up innovation [c’est à dire qui vient de la base, ndlr]adaptation of modes of action and organizations, ‘Start-Up Army’ spirit, mobilization of the defense industry to scale up… So many faculties that we must make our own”, argues the CEMAT.
This approach must also be applied to the fight against drones “because there is no doubt that, in a few years, the pendulum will swing back from the sword to the armor” and it will be “he who knows how to neutralize the opposing threat that the advantage will return, in waiting for the next technological breakthrough,” he maintains. It’s about “not having a war of delay”, he insists.
In terms of drones and robotics, the Military Programming Law [LPM] 2024-30 provides for an investment of 5 billion euros. “New multi-year contractual frameworks pooling the needs between different State services will be sought to simplify the acquisition of small ISR drones [renseignement, surveillance et reconnaissance] », specifies the text.
While awaiting the realization of the projects carried out by the LPM, the Army has already put itself in working order, with the creation of its Drone School as well as an experimental unit to “test and validate equipment and concepts in a short loop”, the promotion of “local innovation” and, according to the CEMAT, the “generalization of flight training” according to the formula “fly as you shoot”.
Finally, General Schill classifies Army drones according to three categories: “combatant drones”, inexpensive, easy to mass produce and “consumable”, “specialized drones carrying multi-effect loads, with develop in the short term and at a controlled cost” and “command drones”, which have long endurance and must be developed in a “sovereign manner”.
Photo: Drone NX-70 by Novadem (c) Novadem
2023-11-12 11:50:23
#Drones #General #Schill #instill #StartUp #Army #spirit #Army
