Why are maritime drones so hard to beat?
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 05. 2024
- Russia has fired the navy chief because the Black Sea Fleet continues to lose warships. But the reality is there is nothing they can do about it. In this video I explain why maritime drones are such a difficult challenge. We should not expect that other navies in Russia's place would have performed any better.
0:00 Russian navy chief fired
1:01 A hard problem
1:35 Difference between the air and the sea
2:39 Sea clutter
4:21 Relying on visual observation
5:22 Packs of drones
6:04 Observation on bigger distances
6:34 A problem for all navies
7:28 Airpower as a solution
Please be aware of attempts at impersonation scams in the comments section. There have been cases where people take my thumbnail picture and pretend to be me. Typically they will ask you to contact them on another platform like Telegram or WhatsApp. Don’t do that. It’s not actually me.
If you want to get in contact with me outside of CZcams, then Mastodon is my preferred social media platform (@anderspuck@krigskunst.social).
Soon with AI they will copy your face AND voice and upload videos pretending to be you saying whatever. It's coming. Viewers need to be vigilant.
@@JELmusicthey will make AI who will analize and ban malicious content from other AI.
AI war of information is ahead of us.
Hm I guess at the moment CZcams has no monetary motivation to protect its users, so they don't… So if AI gets better CZcams still won't be interested.
Soon with AI, you will have the option to sort and verify all of your content. No more spam, scam, misinformation, dysinformation and propoganda.@@JELmusic
Question: does "AWACS" like airborne radar change how hard it is to detect surfacedrones? I do recall a possible claim from someone that the SAAB version would be able to detect a jetski. This was said without any parameters provided ofc so i dont mean this as solution but im curious how the radarproblem at seas shows on Airborne radar planes?
Edit: ok, so i wrote this meanwhile watching, you brought this up somewhat at the last chapter. Thank you!
Every other navy on Earth must be watching the events in the Black Sea and taking notes furiously.
I think a lot of people is taking note. BTW, I am seriously concerned for the western ships currently in the Red Sea. I never think a priori that I am always better or smarter than others, even considering the objective mistakes made by the Russians in this war.
The video is absolutely very explanatory!
We are!
I hope Taiwan is taking notes. Taiwan making 1000s of these drones would prevent or deter a Chinese invasion and potentially prevent WW3 from breaking out...
@@TestTest12332 Yes, these are exactly my throughts. An invasion from sea would be practically impossible with hundreds of drones on Taiwans side - especially when they are sleeping slightly under water and just waiting for a command to attack in swarms of 10, 20, 30? And of course these drones can easily attack any cargo ship entering Chinese ports - which will lead to a total blocking of the Chinese sea trade, if China should block Taiwans trade.
The bet quote of Taiwans surviving has risen a lot since these new weapons are available. And I'm sure Taiwan will have high tech sea drones.
Er, no. My govt is spending $50 billion on warships and has allocated $0 to drones for the army, navy and air force. $0.
Let's hope the green background does not violate CZcams policies. Grass and trees was so offensive in the last video... Great video as always! Thanks Anders!
Bird strike reference was almost Perun grade. Love your analysis, keep going!
There is a tie clip putting undue pressure on that red tie, if that's not violence I don't know what is.
😮😂😂😂😂😂
@@phillipphil1615 It's the most violent thing coming out of Scandinavia since 1066.
😂😂😂
Former merchant navy here. There are such things such as growlers, which are small bits of iceberg that fallen off and they are terrifying as they too are virtually impossible to see on a radar but unlike a drone they move so slowly that you can rely upon visibility alone. But radar is virtually pointless when it comes to growlers, so I can absolutely understand the drone issue.
Interesting. I used to run fishing boats off the US Pacific coast. I've seen calm days where I could see birds on the radar. It was confusing at first because I'd never been able to adjust the gain to the point it would show such small targets due to normal sea clutter. Most of the time I was watching for larger targets like boats and buoys. These usually had radar reflectors on them to help improve their radar echos. I can imagine how hard it would be to mark a target like a low profile marine drone that was designed to hide from radar. At night they could be all but invisible.
As a former U.S. Navy SAR helicopter crewman/swimmer, I have personal experience and can concur with what Mr. Nielsen says about finding items at sea. It’s very difficult.
And the notion that the solution is to patrol the waters heavily with helicopters, hunting for drones... I mean, great at all, until Ukraine starts sticking MANPADS on the occasional drone. Technologically complex (need to be able to handle it via Starlink), but not so complex that it won't be done if helicopters ever become too much of an issue.
@@karenrobertsdottir4101 I suspect manpads on surface drones of the size and simplicity that Ukraine is currenty using is a big ask. And you don't need to use helicopters to geat air surveillance you can use airborne drones, which have been somewhat difficult for manpads to hit.
The obvious solution to dealing with airborne surveillace drones is ECM surface drone, however that of course gives away the fact you have surface drone in the area.
I can't wait til they strap a piorun to an articulating arm and put the whole thing on a sea drone. Maybe make a hydrofoil sea drone so it's easier to get a steady shot on something as small as a helicopter at distance.
@@1337flite They could have some guys in a boat with a MANPAD tagging along behind the drones. If you're hunting for air patrols, you don't need to get anywhere near the target ship.
@@1337flite Except Russia very much has been using helicopters for drone protection. Namely, because once they spot a target, they have limited time to take it out, so they like to have significant firepower available. Helicopters are also quite available for the role, and tend to have good sensors, plus a multi-person crew for spotting targets.
One could try pairing e.g. Orlan with some FPV drones... you'd need to be able to recover them all because on most flights you won't find anything, and that means a recovery system suitable for a ship (if not in port). And I'm honestly not sure how effective a FPV drone would be at targeting something in waves. Plus, remember that you can't get a crew kill here - you have to take out a critical, non-redundant piece of hardware, or set off the warhead. I've watched some videos from the Russians of them trying to take them out with machine guns, and it sure seems like they can soak a good number of hits before a shot gets lucky enough to take out something critical. It's not like a an aircraft or missile where any reduction in power is fatal and everything is built ultralight. Like, all well and good if you punch a hole in a fuel tank, but it doesn't have another 1000km left to travel, it has only 3km left to travel by this point.
(If they ever make them into series hybrids (genset charges multiple battery packs feeding multiple electric motors), they'll be even more redundant. Combine it with an insensitive warhead, and along with redundant comms (they already do that now) and sensors.... well, good luck by that point)
"The problem is unsolvable" That's what I wanted to hear. :)
Even if it was solvable, the chances of the russian military solving the problem would be less than zero😂
The interesting thing is he said Western navies wouldn't do any better against these done attacks.
@@traumvonhaiti Western navies aren't a joke like the russian navy, and aren't staffed by drunken baffoons😂
Yes, do not think about it, just go with what you wanted to hear. Really smart.
@@Princip666I heard putin screaming "KYIV IN THREEEEE DAYYYYYYSSS!" 😆
The Russian Black Sea navy historically did well only against the backward and technically inferior Ottoman navy in the Black sea in the 18-19th centuries. All other wars were a disaster for it.
Russia's Black Sea navy has a track record of being scuttled by their own crews: 1854, 1918.
It looks like Ukraine is helping Russia keep their Black Sea navy tradition alive.
The same by the way can be said about Russia's Baltic and Pacific navies.
Russian navies are in general useless.
Doesn't mean anything by itself, though. The US military was not exactly great in the 18-19th centuries either.
The black sea is kind of a Russian lake, I wouldn't put much priority on it either relative to the requirements for the Atlantic or Pacific.
Nah, the Russian, and Soviet navies are hilarious (unless you happen to be press ganged into it?) A veritable laughing stock, there's plenty CZcams videos on the subject!) And I'm British, we have a fine navy, but have had our share of incredibly stupid army officers who bought their commission and we come off looking like MENSA geniuses compared to Russian navies...
@@tnix80 Russian lake? I think many countries with coastline in the Black Sea would disagree.
Russia could easily solve the problem by withdrawing their troops from the country they invaded.
That is so simple, and
just makes too much
sense for any gov.
They'll Never do it!
Bloodthirsty Putin will never go for it
Withdraw, regroup, retrain, restock, restore ... and try again.
Try again, and keep on trying until hell freezes over. The Russian leadership is both insane and frightened, which doesn't bode well. Look at the past to see the future-the kamikaze pilots of WW2, for example, weren't drunk at the controls, they were fully sober and aware.
Damn! Why didn't I think of that?! XD
Looser talk
Thanks as always Anders. I have been impressed with Ukraine's sea drone attack strategy. Not only to develop the technology to strike Russian ships hundreds of kilometers away, with drones that apparently respond to commands but with a 3 second delay but also the multi layered attacks, with waves of air borne drone and missiles, to confuse or divert Russian defences into thinking a land target was the objective and concealing the sea drone attack. More than anything. Ukraine continues to assess the effectiveness of its strategies, learning what works or why it didn't, changing tactics from attacks on Russian air defences to ships to oil refineries and keeping Russia guessing what will be next.
To me the most impressive is that the Russians just can't do anything about it. They can't retaliate against Ukrainian ships. And even the launching points of drones are out of reach: As Anders commented, they would need air superiority to do that.
@@VFella Yes, I think one of the Nato advisers to Ukraine summed the tactics up as stretch, starve and strike. The Russian air defences are definitely stretched, do they protect the front lines and Kremlin or move to refineries and naval areas? Ukraine's main problem is the lack of ammunition supplies, unable to repel a Russia with a zombie army and scorched earth artillery and aviation strikes.
@@richardhasler6718 No, they lack boots on the ground. Russian air defenses are only getting better, they have a lot of different systems that are close to fully integrated. If it was not for the USA satellites monitoring when things are cycled or relocated Ukraine would have not got anything through. And that is the whole issue with this war - Russia is fighting with both arms behind it's back.
They can easily take out the USA spy drones and satellites - but that is crossing a line for them on the path to escalation which the west has shown less concern about.
The west has shown they cannot produce like Russia, why, the MIC of the west is for profit and it is corrupt and controls all western governments. It is part of the core reason why NATO needs to keep growing. And why the system has become so inefficient when up against a peer military power.
NOT UKRAINE BUT NATO. they are directing and coordinating these attacks especially Britain this is bread and butter stuff to the Royal Navy.
Few other issues which makes sea drones hard to target.
1. The curvature of the Earth. If your radar is 5m off the water, at 10km, 0.3m (over a foot) is obscured. If the drone is 1m high and you have 0.5m waves (pretty calm), the most you can see is 20cm of the craft.
2. Speed. A typical speed boat running 45 knots is closing at about 1 km ever 40 seconds. Even if you can "see" it at 2.5km, you could have less than two minutes for someone to scan a five or six square kms of ocean.
3. Vision. Darkness, fog, rain, sun in your eyes, etc. can all make it all but impossible to see those distances. Further, if you are in harbour and anchored you probably have coastline, rocks, islands, other ships, etc.
4. Other attacks/distractions. Air attacks, air drones nearby, etc. can easily get your attention. Naval drones can use smoke screens, flares, lights, radar reflecting panels, chaff dispensers, etc. to draw attention. A drone 5km out with a blinking light and aluminum panels is going to draw attention.
5. They are almost impossible to target. They are too small and moving too fast for missiles or large gun systems to target with any radar-based system. Something like a 50mm gun would need a thermal or night vision site and they are hard pressed to hit things the size of people moving quickly with single shot weapons and they pretty much need direct hits. A raid firing 30mm system might, but most of these are radar guided for use against aircraft. When aimed at something 3km away on the horizon, they can't easily spray and area. Most visually aimed heavy and machine guns typically don't have thermal sights, can't easily be aligned to radar or thermal directions (i.e. the gunner needs to visually see the target even if the ship's radar or thermals could see it), and realistic ranges are likely in the sub 1km range. (i.e. you have less than 45 seconds).
etc.
This said, there are things other navies can do which help -- staying out at sea, moving, using thermal imaging systems, smoke screens, patrol boats further out, nets and sea fencing around ports, or specific ships, proximity detonating mines/buoys around ships, laser grid detection, radar on smaller patrol ships, acoustic sensors, GPS/data sharing (so you know where your own ships are), etc.
Proximity mines triggered by what. These drones have by all reason very very little ferromagnetic material.
@@SianaGearzSound? Its been done before.
The thing I can't grasp is why a properly CIWS equipped ship would have these problems. We have seen thermal tracking on those systems since the 1980s
@@SianaGearz train a dolphin to carry the mine to the drone and then trigger it
@@SianaGearzMotion sensors, IR, sound, wires between floats, etc. They use sensors on commercial floats to keep them from being stolen. They also use them near ports to track ships getting too close to restricted peers. I'm sure the US (and other navies) have sensor grids around key naval bases. Even without explosives they can still tell you if something is nearby and from where.
I know nothing about this, but wouldn't it be possible to attach a steel grid to the waterline of the ships?
Retired US navy (FCA), and I'm going to have to push back against a lot of that. The tech to protect your own ship at least, absolutely does exist. The SPS-67 can easily detect something like the naval drones Ukraine is using. More over the Aegis system will flag the contact as a surface vessel almost instantly as it will remain constant, have a Bering that is consistent or close to that, and have a high speed. Nothing natural is going to do that. At this point both the Phalanx and Mark 38 can track it with FLIR. Which speaking from experience can both see something the size of a seagull at well over 1kt in total darkness.
The issue as I see it is Russia has nothing that even comes close to Aegis, for a computer support perspective which is how you know its a boat not a seagull or a big wave, and no system like Phalanx or the Mark 38 which can track a target in infrared.
well i guess we may see what happens if iran makes swarms of sea drones. i'm sure they are on it right now.
Much infra red from a Magura?
Seems unlikely
Exactly, and the threat of such drones is not at all new either. Except it used to be guys in speed boats laden with explosives. Most western CIWS are specifically adapted to track and engage surface vessels such as these drones, and can handle swarms of them as well. Apparently, modern Russian CIWS and accompanying tracking radar is quite capable and likewise designed to defend against surface targets. They don't put them on many ships, though. I think only one of them sank by Ukraine had it. I'd as soon suspect a lapse from the seaman manning it as the equipment.
Thanks for the insights. Based on rumors of Moskvas demise it seems likely most Black Sea Fleet vessels aren't exactly running top notch IR detection systems with Eagle Eyed sailors 24-7.
Also curious about the sonar aspect- surely these jet powered drones are awfully bloody noisy on the way in?
@@geopolitix7770
Russia's big issue is their computer support sucks. Not quite 2 years ago he did a video about the Moskva. You can see that Russian radar displays and computer enhancement is on the level of the early 80s or late 70s by US standards. That's going to be a deal killer here. You MUST have the computer power for the computer to look at your hundreds of contacts and highlight the ones that might be interesting.
sonar is going to be very dependent on what's going on at the moment. The two big things are going to be your speed and local conditions. The faster you go the worse your sonar preforms. The other complicator is sea conditions and how noisy the environment is. That is a combo of how much is going on locally other ships, drilling for oil, etc, and weather. Most notably the latter. In bad weather aka a high sea state. your sonar is only going to be a tiny fraction of its normal effectiveness. As as just like with the surface radar you are going to get noise, in this case literally, from all the waves forming and crashing. Filtering that is going to be hard, and absolutely require top tier computer support.
I agree with most of your points, but there are a few factors not covered. Technically the problem is solvable as at least one western navy has been preparing for those small boat types of attacks whether manned or unmanned. The multiset solutions involve the appropriate munitions with the appropriate effects, some guided munitions, improved surface radar and non-radar sensors, electronic warfare and lastly human systems integration. It is a complex problem that Russians have not spent the time or money attempting to solve. In short, they are screwed for at least a couple more years if not longer.
A lot of comments note that there are software techniques for dealing with the clutter problem. I agree it's solveable, but it requires good sensors (which can draw a lot of power), complex algorithms, and high performance electronics to run said algorithms. Russia has always struggled with these things.
Hasn't there been an allegation that Moskva had been unable to power on its fire control radar, because it desperately needed its scarce electricity for something else? Not sure how credible. But well it got sunk, and it's got sunk from the air as we had been told, not water.
You can "minimize" it. You can't solve it to zero.
@@jannegrey593 By "solve" I mean a practical, useful solution. Almost nothing in engineering is perfect.
@@MrZlocktar So why do they use US and Taiwanese electronics in their so advanced technology?
@@MrZlocktar Son. If you don't know about the treaty banning missiles with intermediate range (500 to 5500 km), then don't speak. I assume rest is gibberish as well.
The black sea commander was fired because is quite important for a commander to breathe, have eyes open and interact with people around in a meaningful way 😊
Like Prighozin!😂
@@dpelpaland Gerassimov probably
@@FireEye-zd4fm Well i saw a clipp whats likely to be him having his eyes open and walking around and interacting with people. He did look like he had some brain damage though but the clipp was to short to be certain.
hard to tell with russians@@arturobianco848
@@arturobianco848Well I could easily say something about Russians still in Russia, brains and Vodka but I guess that would be too easy.
I am on neither side but no problem is insoluble. As a mooring officer I can tell you how easily a small craft can be stopped by fishing nets whilst it is dealt with. A boom of floating net surrounding the warships held out wide by a boom right across the aft of the vessel might do the trick and keep explosions away from the Hull. Submarine drones likewise with a hanging net. Not pretty and a faf but worth considering as a shirt term measure whilst other technologies catch up.
When the US Navy was hit by a small boat IED they simply changed policies. It turns out that speedboat sized craft have neither the speed or endurance to keep up with military vessels.
Of course, the US ports aren’t next to aggressors who used such tactics.
Thank you, I learned something new. While I knew of the difficulty with radar detecting water waves, I hadn't fully considered that with reduced distance, the situation basically creates a "zone of detection failure" inside which the drones would be rendered completely invisible to that particular radar.
Yup. Difficult to solve real problems, when you focus your attention on lies and propaganda and misinformation.
Thanks, Anders, your work is appreciated ❤
Slava Ukraini!
The irony is their propaganda hasn't been doing a great job (by relative historic standards) - Russia's own population aren't willing to sign up for the military. That's why Russia has to offer large amounts of money to attract and recruit new soldiers.
Stalin's USSR did much, much better in this regard.
I think the majority of russians still believe putin's _Kyiv in THREE DAYS!"_ 😂
That is why Ukraine loses so badly? Salo Uronili!
@@Princip666 Russia can't even take 10% of Ukraine and has now lost half the land they held 2 years ago. _Kyiv in THREE DAYS!"_ 😂
@@dpelpal None of what you wrote is based on reality. Seek professional help.
That’s why Russia prefers to send missiles into residential buildings, schools and hospitals - no sea clutter.
Worse than sea clutter. Remember most of those are repurposed missiles, either anti ship missiles or air defense missiles. Any sort of precision guidance tech they developed to hit big ships against a flat-ish sea surface, or aircraft in the sky, radars or optical or highlight guided or whatnot, doesn't work for land based targets, so these missiles are on inertial guidance and hit... basically wherever. Broad side of a barn would be too much of a challenge, so they are fundamentally not usable against military targets, just against population centres.
Apparently the homes are built on what were Russian bases. Their maps are based on data from the USSR and haven't been updated
@@ZuluknobThat does not make a lick of sense. I take it you're another vatnik. They have a habit of trying to victim blame.
Zuluknob, there is literally nothing "suspiciously large" about 20+ casualties when striking an apartment building at night. ("the Odessa attack"---Really? Which one of the legions of them?)
@@SianaGearzis that why they seem to always hit tower blocks, you set them up to fly across a city and inevitably they crash into a tower block?
I always appreciate your analysis. And, being a sailor, I know it's very difficult to "see" things in the water at night.
Thanks for a clear explanation without oversimplifying. It is what you do best!
but its wrong . . .
Ships in the Black Sea are fish in a barrel. There are only a few places they can stay in dock and it’s a problem having your ships run continuously to keep them mobile.
Admiral kutnetzov moment
The biggest problem is they need to defend the Crimea bridge. Sinking a few patrol boat is bad but losing a bridge pillar is unacceptable
The good thing about barrels - if you are inside one - is you only have to defend a limited number of directions and spaces.
I wondered why surface drones were working, thanks for the explanation.
but this explanation is completly wrong . . . the russians are to incompetent to do anything about it . . . I can give you a price for a solution if you want . . .
Drones in general work rather well, especially since it's acceptable for them to be destroyed, the actual trained personnel are nowhere near the drone when it is destroyed and they can be significantly smaller and more maneuverable than ones that involve people.
Me too, until he explained it, I was stumped ás to how this was happening.
There are other reasons why the drones are working. The operational requirements around Crimea guarantee that targets will be close to Ukraine.
Ships that are firing missiles must reload…. Those ports are in Crimea. Logistics vessels have a limited # of ports to visit.
These small drones have limited range and speed. When engaging military vessels in open ocean they would have serious trouble because of this. Take western navies and their ports of call into account and see how many are near a potential aggressor state.
Another excellent report! Thank you! I'm always excited to see a notification from your channel pop up. Your thoughtful analysis, presented so articulately sets your videos above many commentors on this platform.
Very, very well described! I circumnavigated the world on a sailboat. Seaclutter is a real problem if one wants to detect small to mid sized objects in any kind of weather.
I found it interesting too. My sailing is less extensive than yours, but I have some experience with radar over 20+ years. My antenna is around 3 metres from the surface at my stern, and sea clutter is much less of a problem than with mounts on the mast even if the range is a bit less. I must admit to being surprised at the current situation, given that back in WW1 planes could pick up German periscopes.
@@johnwilson6721Periscopes leaves a wake. Small drones at night not so visible. Probably leaves a much smaller wake.
always such a treat when Anders uploads a video :)
Thank you for making the war comprehensible. 🥰🥰🥰
@@boringperroRussia is the joke army of the world tho
@@boringperro thanks for aquarium decorations.
THank you Anders. I see you got rid of the atom bomb. I hope your tie is ok. Your discussion is gold.
I think the historical analogy was the introduction of torpedo technology at the end of the 19th century. It was the new "stealth" weapon on the block. Ship designers started putting "anti-torpedo" bulges just under the waterline to get torpedoes to explode early and not damage the main structure. This "solution" causes other problems with ship handling abd is not done any more, but we have had more than a century to figure out how to defend agsinst torpedos.
Probably the best defence is to detect and defeat the torpedo launcher platform before it is launched. Maritime drones are basically surface torpedoes that can be launched from 100s of miles from their target.
The size of the "blind" circle depends among other things on the height of your radar emitter. It depends on the angle between the radar signal and the surface of the water; if the angle is shallower you have less returns from waves (but if the waves are high you may not be able to see over them).
There are TWO channels I click LIKE before I've seen the full video. Yours and Peruns. Always fantastic quality 🙂
I heard that YT algorithm values more 'like' given after some time into the recording, 3 minutes perhaps, so I changed and I wait 3-4-5 mins 😅
The best PowerPoint on the Internet! Love that guy
@@andrzejbarcelonafrlk6416 thanks. I’ll switch to that 👍
Perun?
simp
Really interesting I wasn't aware of how hard it was to detect naval drones. I guess losing those surveillance planes (A-50s?) makes detection even harder.
The a50s are more about detecting missiles and air threats and providing good friend or Foe identification for planes that have their transponders turned off.
@@macmcleod1188 Losing them does weaken Russia's air power over the black sea though, and makes it harder for them to deploy any other aircraft to patrol the area
@BosonCollider absolutely. But the a50s don't directly detect small Naval drones.
Thank you. I always look forward to your reliable commentary. I had no idea that it was so hard to defend against sea drones.
Thank you for another excellent video, Anders. You are very good at explaining military topics to us civilians. I appreciate your work very much!
OUTSTANDING video, thank you sir.
Reminds me of the YAMATO battleship. Pretty impressive AA guns, but there was a distance gap between the range of the different types of batteries.
Spot on!!! You should add history of recent stealth low profile vessels. Mostly are used by drug kartels or smugglers and was and still is unsolvable problem.
It is not . . . only stupid people belive this BS . . . but go ahead and belive it until you see a proper nation deal with this problem . . . not a country with old ships and no maintanance . . .
Your content is among the very highest quality available on any platform, especially this one. Thank you for your work
Thanks for the explanation. Very helpful. I would love to have seen a picture of a typical maritime drone. Thank you
Absolutely fantastic !!! When you are on the news yesterday. You talk briefly about the firing of the naval chief and the problems Russia are facing with naval drones. I just found it really interesting and have huge implications, but wanted a bit more perspective. Now again you have delivered. ❤Thank you for keeping me safe❤
Setting straight all the keyboard Captains!!! Nice tie, btw.
Russian captains be like "I wish I was a keyboard captain"😂
Thank you Anders, this was a great idea for a video. So informative, and answers a question I didn’t even realize I had. I truly enjoy your work.
Nielsen is mistaken about this issue. The US Navy, for example, had to start developing defenses against speedboats - at the time they were manned by suicide crews rather than manned remotely like drone boats, but there's little functional difference - decades ago when Iran threatened maritime traffic in the 1980s. New ships since then are built with these defenses, which work just fine against maritime drones, too. These defenses aren't foolproof, but they are by now highly effective.
It's also to be noted that the Moskva was sunk by aerial weapons, not by maritime drones, so the idea that sea surface attacks are inherently more effective is false. Objects in the air are easier to detect, true, but they also travel much faster, so there's much less time to detect them.
He is correct that the issue is technical, so replacing admirals won't solve it; it will take years or decades of engineering.
still, I'd expect a maritime drone to have a much lower profile thus detectability than a manned fastboat. I don't think that the problem is unsolvable either, but maybe the danger is not to be played down.
It will not take year or decades of engineering ,it will simply take reciprocal thinking and swift action, its a 72 hour problem.
@@BobsUruncle-dl7cs Nielsen is at least correct that it's not a quick fix.
@@psychohist Its a 72 hour problem with an actionable 72 hour single word Solution. You just likely do not speak the language the word is in. Good thing no one is pucking with Canada huh or they would find out. : >)
Because Russia doesn’t have sensor suites that can detect them. Also, 🇺🇦 engages tactics like attacking the secure harbors by air to push 🇷🇺 ships out to sea w/the drones waiting.
They had them, but they ripped them out in the 1990s and sold them on ebay😂
I’ll also add when we see footage it is clear there is no coherent plan in place for defending their ship. It’s mass chaos without sailors sticking to fixed positions and we’ve even seen captains coming to a dead stop in the water out of choice and not damage.
@@The_ZeroLine_Drunken russian sailors firing 1950s era rifles isn't a plan?_ 😂
Sensor suites that can detect them? And what exactly is that supposed to be?
Imagine what'll happen when Ukraine gets access to its coast line east of Krim and can launch their naval drones from there!
I do enjoy the meme borrowed from The Hunt for Red October:
"Andrei, you lost another ship to a country with no navy?"
Those drones are a kind of navy.
those drones are NATO
@@zerge69 If so, good for NATO.
@@gregcampwriter bad for NATO. The Russians also have autonomous weapons.
@@zerge69those drones are all Ukraine.
Great explanation and presentation Anders. Thanks for all the hard work.
It was a very interesting analysis of naval drone warfare!
I see you have a new intro. Hope it solves the problem as your videos should reach more people.
💛💙💜💙💛 good to see you, Anders! 🇺🇦 🌏 🇳🇱 🇺🇸
🇳🇱🇪🇺💪🏻💪🏻
After the war, the OUN circles operating in exile conducted a systematic action of changing history. In publications, studies and memoirs, the topic of cooperation with Germany, participation in the Holocaust and murdering Poles was omitted. The OUN and the UPA were presented as noble organizations fighting for a free Ukraine against two enemies - the Third Reich and the USSR. An idealized image of Bandera was also built as an outstanding politician, leader of the nation, thinker and noble fighter for freedom. All those who recalled the Ukrainian collaboration, participation in the Holocaust and the Volhynia massacre were called Soviet agents. Rossoliński-Liebe
In the 1930s, the leaders of the OUN saw the Ukrainian national movement as part of European fascist movements and did not hide it at all. Hand in hand with the Germans
The consequence of these views was the rapprochement of the OUN with Nazi Germany. The practical experience gained then was used by the OUN-UPA in 1943, carrying out the ethnic cleansing of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia. At the end of the war, the Germans decided to use the collaborative enthusiasm of the Ukrainians on a larger scale. They released Bandera and offered him cooperation in the fight against communism, they also formed the Ukrainian Waffen-SS division (to which as many as 80,000 volunteers signed up!).
The cult and fanaticism that surrounds the Nationalists of the OUN-UPA and SS Galizien in Ukraine, who are responsible for the genocide against Jewish and Polish civilians during World War II. Let us condemn the cult of cruelty and hatred.
The report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights accuses Azov of war crimes: looting, unlawful detention and torture (and not only them, as far as the Ukrainian forces are concerned.
The Wolfsangel, or wolf's hook, is also a well-known neo-Nazi symbol, previously used by the Wehrmacht and SS. However, the Azovs explain that it is an abbreviation of Ідея Нації, i.e. "Idea of the Nation".
Watching the drone development in the Ukraine-Russia war unfold in real time feels to me like reading about the evolution of the air plane as a weapon in WWI. The innovations are amazing and utterly frightening at the same time. There's a slew of ethical questions that become relevant to look at in general, but they'll obviously have to wait until at least this war is done.
Thanks, Anders. Your explanations are always very thoughtful.
As a long time kayaker I know the big ships can't see me and if they could they can do nothing. So when you are a small boat just in the surface, keep out of the big ships way. What is a bug for a kayaker is a feature for a drone.
I think the next levet is drones that carry military torpedes or missiles. They can sneak in close and out of nowhere a torpede starts pingin in at 1000 m or a missile is lauched. No time to react.
Might happen eventually, but right now just having the naval drone ram the ship and detonate has negliable system investment costs A capable naval missile or torpedo with a launch procedure would be in the multi hundreds of thousands, so simply not cost effective. A weapons platform just needs to be good enough to solve the task at hand.
@@ipadista The next level is when they find out countermeasurements.
Axis powers have means, methods and resources to develop such drones. When they provide huthi a drone fleet and the first US vessel is on the bottom of red sea, even maga understand what they should have done last year.
they have a few they designed with mlrs rockets which are unguided . i think they tried it with 4 rockets . i don't know if such rockets have enough punch to do any real damage. ramming a ship with 500 kg of explosives will for sure make a hole . the stategy is to make a hole and send another drone through the hole to detonate inside.
@@unreal4127maga never understands anything . they only listen to their leader. it's a cult.
I remember in the mid 80's submariners were in a panic when the first radars capable of filtering the waves clutter appeared aboard the anti-submarine patrol planes. Suddenly the planes could see the snorkels. Tactics adjusted, submarines became less dependent on the snorkel.
I wonder if a solution would not be a swam of light radar drones maintaining a permanent watch around each ship. That might require quite a number of them, wearing out quickly.
Not realistic on smaller ships.
@@LarsRyeJeppesen right, except if you keep your ships grouped, when they combine their defense. A small ship alone is probably left with his speed as its only defense: never stop. The latest kills were against ships at rest, I believe.
Amusingly, in the sail era, the best defense for small ships was their speed. With naval drones, are we back to the 18th century naval tactics?
Excellent video. Thank you for taki g the time to educate us. Much appreciated 🇬🇧
Thank you for your analysis.
Anders.Thanks for this amazingly informative video.After watching the Perun video on the Littorial Combat Ship program,it mentions that speedboat defense was one of its original mission "modules", but the program is a failure.He did mention the Danish version , which seems to be success in some areas. I'm sure they'll lead the way on solving this 21st century threat.Hopefully the Houthis wont be able to acquire these before counter measures can be developed.
I deeply appreciate your work on YT outside of your day job.
👍👍👍
The world's largest navies shudder in fear of 18 foot open fishing boats powered by outboard motors .
@@BigDsGaming2022Thanks for the reply.
I guess you're unaware that Ukrainian USVs are not the motor boats used by Somali pirates or the Houthis.Perhaps you do know that, but that's not your point.Thanks again
same to you and Anders rocks@@GafferBob
Great, clear and helpful contribution to common understanding. Thank you.
Thanks M. Nielsen. Very informative as usual.
Always nice to listen. Interesting aspects.
Nice with an optimistic and cheerful video once in a while.
As usual great explanation thank you Aussie Al
once a navy is sort of stuck in place or has limited maneuver room, then relatively small vessels with the right munitions can pretty much dominate. The Black Sea is a limited scope environment. Ukraine losing most of their navy almost immediately was actually a tactical benefit.
I found the video helpful and informative. Thank you.
Thanks Anders, yet again another excellent update and explanation
Great video, very insightful. Thanks!! 👍
Always informative!
Really good video, thanks mate. ❤
Micro drones are hard to beat for the same reason hat sea drones are hard to beat. The radars that could easily have been designed that are needed to detect, track and classify them just were not bothered with. They certainly haven’t been integrated into a vehicle with an air burst gun. Ironically Hensolt the company that makes the TRML/4D radar for the IRIST/T has a range of radars to protect civilian sports stadiums and airports but no one bothered doing anything for field soldiers.
Wow, what an excellent technical analysis. Would just like to add, not only is it extremely difficult to see these maritime drones, but from videos I've seen of Somali pirates etc., super hard to hit them with gunfire, due to their extremely low height amid bobbing waves.
Great explanation... took me back to my Navy days in Combat! So much watchstanding! I think the most important aspect here is how well trained the radar operator is. An experienced operator can often identify what is noise and what is not and is adept at configuring their scope.
Excellent explanation of ground clutter, signal strength, noise and “steath geometry”. But I did miss the angle on sonar, engine sounds, and the fact that sonar operators primarily listens to other people’s screw noise 😂
And though you usually don’t use Hollywood clips in your videos, there was a great opportunity to reference “The Hunt for Red October”
I find your CZcams canal is so informative. Thank you for doing it, Anders.
Thank you, Anders Puck Nielsen, for your analysis. Very informative and I already look forward to your next video.
Being a little tiny sailboat in the Straits of Gibraltar sailing over to Morocco I experienced this problem, big ships cannot see you. Great video and explanation! Glad to see you up and undaunted by the algorithm. I wrote to CZcams complaining btw. Thanks much for all the valuable intel.
Always excellent presentations. Thank you, Anders.
Great to see You're"up and running on CZcams again, Anders! 👍
Nice explanation, Anders! Thank you!
Thanks for your honest comments. Many would just take this situation and say "Russians are incompetent." Thanks for the fair approach.
As always, a very informative video, thank you very much. However, I have to disagree on one point. The sinking of the Moskva clearly demonstrated that the Russians' ability to defend themselves against attacks from the air is also pretty inadequate.
No drones were used though. These were expensive Neptune missiles
@@LarsRyeJeppesen This is largely true, but afaik at the same time there was also a Bayraktar in the air, possibly providing targeting data and serving as a distraction.
ADD: By the way, the price of a Neptune anti-ship missile is pretty relative: compared to a Sea-Baby it may be rather expensive and even more so when you compare it with FPV drones, but compared to the price of a Slava-class cruiser it's a bargain.
@LarsRyeJeppesen sea skimming cruise missiles are old tech and also a threat moskva was supposedly designed to be able to deal with. Whatever went wrong, I think we can chalk it up to "Idiots in the Russian Navy "
@@robderich8533I agree re:cost. If you consider budget per unit exposure, as long as the total scenario offensive cost X budget ratio > target utility replacement cost, it's a win (ceteris parabus).
Great analysis of a topic which I never considered. Thanks
Many , many thanks to be so clear and explicit...you made me understand an hidden but capital fact...
Thank you for the explaination. This was VERY interesting fro an old coot who was a military radar tech in the '60s. Back then our systems
were analog, not modern digital, and I had sort of assumed that modern systems with some great firmware could lessen the problem.
Proof again that Mother Nature always has the last word......
Very good explanation as always. Thank you!
Thank you, for these information. Great video.
Thank you for your well considered observation.
Good explain as always. Thank you Anders
Along with the lack of suitable sensor suites, radar, etc, can be added the relatively small size of the drones, as well as their maneuverability. These factors, included with the randomizing of movement from the waves in 'all' axes, ensure drones are going to be a difficult threat to counter for some time. Naturally, the angle that weapons can be depressed, also needs to be taken into account and addressed accordingly in future ship designs and modifications.
This is the video I was waiting to see.
Another great analysis. Thank you.
your insightful explanation was fascinating.
Where's the titillation? No naked trees, not even a naked drone. 😁Rats for CZcams censorship . . . oh well. But delighted to see you up and running again after the CZcams problem. Very interesting to learn about the issue with detecting objects at sea. And what a victory for Ukraine in dealing with the Black Sea force - Ukraine is so very, very clever !! Slava Ukraini 💛💙
Y T has apparently recently censored a part of the video by suchomimus about a ru Sam site hit by ua, where a ru soldier said "f*k, I got hi t in the le gs, again" - the video stayed online, but the audio track was altered so that the phrase was no longer there (covered by the engine noise pasted over that from the nearby part of the soundtrack where noone is speaking). And that without any advisory, so it felt very much 1984.
As if y t was in the enjoy of the reds.
other navies would handle maritime drone attacks marginally better than the russians simply due to more modern sensors. russia is still rocking soviet era stuff, with some upgrades if they're lucky. but yeah, they'd still have trouble. there are probably ways to work around the limitations of radar like this though, ways of combining sensor data, AI processing of radar data to filter out the noise, and certainly more i'd have no clue about.
More excellent analysis, thank you Anders
Brilliant, each and every time! Thank you very much!
Anders ville bare sige, jeg synes virkelig du gør det godt.
Would a group of sea drones be called a "school"...like fish? Pack? Gaggle?
A pack, as in a pack of wolves, rather than a leaderless gaggle.
Proper name is a _troop_ of drones.
@@petergarrone8242 Does a gaggle of geese have a leader when it flies in a V? I personally like a school of drones lol
@@dpelpal land, sea and air?
A boredom of drones - sorry wrong sort of drone.
Very informative and very understandable. Good job.
4:01 I feel the need to add 'why' sea clutter can't be fixed
Because the only fix on maritime radars for clutter is to tell the radar 'ignore any object below X cm tall above the sea level'.
Which means that against maritime drones that are really low in the water, you have to choose between:
A - Seeing the drone and ALL the waves, good luck picking which of the 300 objects is the right target
B - Not the waves or the drone, good luck finding the drone
Source: I work volunteer maritime rescue for Dutch KNRM and have to operate such radars (civilian ones) sometimes in bad weather.
Disclaimer: The navies of today may be sitting on more advanced solutions by now, I wouldn't know, I was army 2006-2010 then reservist 2010-2017, never navy
Good morning!
You don't really comprehend this problem unless you have been IN the ocean, looking UP at...."USS Navy Ship".... getting smaller and smaller and smaller; or until you have tried to shoot a floating crate in the ocean from the deck of a ship at sea. Then you will "begin" to understand the problem.
that needed to be said
@@grandrapids57"that human being is 30,000x bigger than that mosquito. They'll have no problem killing it! They'll never get bitten!"
@@DanKaschel Was ist das?
@@grandrapids57
What (which part) is your question?
@@thomas1699 trying to use a phone with multiple messages is a pain. I didn't understand the part of the with the mosquito and I thought there is something rather interesting behind how you phrased it.
Keep bringing us great stuff!
As always an awesome and very informative video.
Gen. Valeri Gerasimov's "firing" follows a now familiar pattern. In both firings, both were fired about 3 months after Ukraine claimed that commanders were killed in missile attacks, which were denied by Ruzzia.
First, the Commander of the e Black Sea Fleet, Adm Nikolai Yevmenov was "fired" about 3 months after the Black Sea Fleet Headquarters building in Sevastopol was gutted by a Storm Shadow missile attack. Now, Gen. Gerasimov has been "fired" roughly 3 months after his visit to Army Headquarters west of Kherson, where he had been the day it was destroyed by a missile attack. In each case, it was claimed that the men were not present during the missile attack.
In Gen. Gerasimov's case, he's only been seen twice, once in a meeting of the General Staff, the second, a helicopter flight in _February_ over Rostov-on-Don in which field and trees were a lush green. February in Rostov is bitterly cold and snowy, with thisFebruary breaking numerous records for its severity, so that video was _not_ shot I'm February leading to certainty that he was not alive after the missile attack.
Ruzzia waits just long enough for the missile attacks to fade from memory and then report the commanders' replacement. Typical Ruzzian maskirovka (military propaganda).
Where T.F. is this fucking Gerasimov anyway? Is he dead or what?
@Evan490BC I believe he's not alive. About three months ago, he was visiting Southern Army Headquarters in the Mariupol area when it was hit with Storm Shadow missles. He was only "seen" twice after that.
@@brucegotohell1323Yes, I know about the Mariupol incident, but I've been disappointed before by the ability of the ruᛋᛋians to survive... 🤔