NATO return to Cold War force structure

[kokovi]

We will see how armored vehicles will perform on the drone battlefield if they have enough air defence in the maneuver elements. The window of drone dominance might also be limited to a few years until rapidly firing laser weapons become available, probably in about five years.

Edited October 31, 2025 by kokovi

[Sinistar]

2 hours ago, TrustMe said:

Given that in the Ukraine war tanks and APC's are just targets for drones the whole idea of wheeled or tracked vehicles otherwise known as mechanized tactics maybe obsolete.

 

generally i agree

you even see this beginning to occur before the ukraine russia conflict in other battlefields

 

there may be a tendency to hedge and not give them up completely when comes the day for some reason the drones do not figure into it or suddenly some new wrinkle enters into it and then when they are needed they are not available and that is what parties fear

 

eg- a peculiarity in local conditions or terrain permits the return to armored formations or before an opponent has the opportunity to establish itself and a blitz is still possible before that

 

perhaps

 

 tanks are quite often another form of self propelled artillery

 remain under cover or hidden until given tasks to briefly expose themselves and fire on general locations or coordinates from reports and then immediately leave the area

so even though it is not ideal and not the intended purpose the realities of this war mean they improvise and adapt and this is what it comes to

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Martineleca]

12 hours ago, kokovi said:

We will see how armored vehicles will perform on the drone battlefield if they have enough air defence in the maneuver elements. The window of drone dominance might also be limited to a few years...

The performance of ATGMs during the Yom Kippur war must have seriously rattled the mechanised branches in every military on the planet, it led the US and Soviet Union to raise their tank inventory objectives by some 40% meaning a lot of older Pattons and T-55/62s that were slated for retirement remained on stock for much longer as AFV losses in any potential conflict were expected to be very heavy. Breakthroughs in technology resulted in this new threat window closing somewhat and it's been a back and forth ever since then, but at no point has the complete removal of armoured warfare as a concept been seriously considered just because its employment would lead to losses, won't happen this time either.

[yochlol]

20 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

   Actually, it is quite logical for Baltic terrain 

1) They have inhereted dense road network (created by Germans and USSR)  - so in almost every useful place there is a road, and where it is not - even tracked vehicle is in trouble (see the incident with M88 lost on excercises with all hands onboard by just driving the dirt road), so wheeled vehicles are quite logical for domestic use (they could travel regular roads next to everywhere without damage).

2) Their armies are to significant extent expendable expeditionary force for the case of "police mission in Russia" west is hoping/dreaming for, so high mobility of wheeled vehicles could be usefull in case of another "trouble in Moscow".

Apart from this ^^ absolute baloney I don't see the Baltic countries (there's three of them!) going for wheeled IFV's as their main platform.

Estonia has been operating CV90's for a while now and the recent purchase of Otokar's ARMA falls in the APC section.
Latvia has been operating the small CVRT's for a while now and is seeking to replace them with ASCOD2.
Lithuania's BOXERS are probably what sparked this narrative, but they are also looking to purchase roughly same quantity of CV90 and most significantly they will be operating Leo2A8 in the future (i.e. IFV's will no longer be their toughest kit).

[TrustMe]

1 hour ago, Martineleca said:

The performance of ATGMs during the Yom Kippur war must have seriously rattled the mechanised branches in every military on the planet, it led the US and Soviet Union to raise their tank inventory objectives by some 40% meaning a lot of older Pattons and T-55/62s that were slated for retirement remained on stock for much longer as AFV losses in any potential conflict were expected to be very heavy. Breakthroughs in technology resulted in this new threat window closing somewhat and it's been a back and forth ever since then, but at no point has the complete removal of armoured warfare as a concept been seriously considered just because its employment would lead to losses, won't happen this time either.

I agree with what your saying, but if you look at Ukraine war. There's a 75km deep front which means that traditional concentration of force doesn't work, any sort of armoured forces should be easily found and delt with within a short time frame well before the frontline is penetrated due to the abundance of cheap recon drones. The use of these recon drones has completely changed the status quo.

[Ssnake]

...until the resurgence of AAA will completely change the picture to something that might resemble the status quo ante a bit more, again.

[MiGG0]

33 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

...until the resurgence of AAA will completely change the picture to something that might resemble the status quo ante a bit more, again.

All traditional AAA methods are too short ranged to really change recon drones adventage (it can do its job way out if their range). IMO anti drone drones are the future (and drones overall, tank drones, artillery drones, etc).

[Josh]

27 minutes ago, MiGG0 said:

All traditional AAA methods are too short ranged to really change recon drones adventage (it can do its job way out if their range). IMO anti drone drones are the future (and drones overall, tank drones, artillery drones, etc).

I think there are cheap SAM possibilities like APKWS, as well as EW. I also think some top tier nations have or will develop a capability to find the controlling stations and strike them - ISR platforms need to operate at higher altitudes and send a signal back; they cannot simply be fully automated. But certainly anti drone UAVs will have a role to play.

[MiGG0]

29 minutes ago, Josh said:

I think there are cheap SAM possibilities like APKWS, as well as EW. I also think some top tier nations have or will develop a capability to find the controlling stations and strike them - ISR platforms need to operate at higher altitudes and send a signal back; they cannot simply be fully automated. But certainly anti drone UAVs will have a role to play.

Effective EW has been relatively short ranged so imo not that effective against recon drones. APKWS has potential, but depending on drone (IE Gerbera), rocket still cost more than recon drone itself and long run it is not cost effective. 

[Ssnake]

Either way, small mid-range ISR drones are so much of a pain that all major armies will develop countermeasures in what form ever to at least dial back the problem. This is not an unsolvable problem but at the least a mitigable challenge. Physical destruction is possible. Doing it cheaply, and being able to detect them with some reliability are the primary tasks. Once solved, the solution can and will be rolled  out in significant numbers to restore enough obscuration that operational surprise may be possible again.

[Josh]

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

Either way, small mid-range ISR drones are so much of a pain that all major armies will develop countermeasures in what form ever to at least dial back the problem. This is not an unsolvable problem but at the least a mitigable challenge. Physical destruction is possible. Doing it cheaply, and being able to detect them with some reliability are the primary tasks. Once solved, the solution can and will be rolled  out in significant numbers to restore enough obscuration that operational surprise may be possible again.

I think it would be more accurate say prolific, persistent ISR is a huge threat in general. In Ukraine and Russia, this is mostly enabled by class 2 UAVs, but other nations might use other means. This could be UAVs of other sizes or even space assets. The NRO launched 180 satellites into LEO as part of its new proliferated network from May 2024-April 2025, 20+ at a time in most cases. That was probably only Tranche1 of a much larger constellation. Revisit times are probably already measured in minutes. The Spaceforce has stated a GMTI constellation will start to orbit in 2028. China will presumably attempt to catch up as soon as it has sufficient launch capacity.

Ukraine and Russia achieve widespread theater ISR on the cheap with relatively expendable platforms, but that is not the only model that might have to be countered, just probably the most accessible one.

Edited November 2, 2025 by Josh

[Martineleca]

20 hours ago, TrustMe said:

I agree with what your saying, but if you look at Ukraine war. There's a 75km deep front which means that traditional concentration of force doesn't work...

But that's been the case for a while, during the late Cold War period the central front had a zone of death spanning 50km from the main line of contact in which hundreds of helicopter gunships and AT teams prowled to interdict any mech column moving through it. Massive losses were to be expected in this dangerous environment, but that's what follow on forces are for, at Fulda the US Army stationed armoured regiments whose sole mission was to block the valley route to Frankfurt with the wreckage of all their tanks if need be.

[MiGG0]

3 hours ago, Martineleca said:

But that's been the case for a while, during the late Cold War period the central front had a zone of death spanning 50km from the main line of contact in which hundreds of helicopter gunships and AT teams prowled to interdict any mech column moving through it. Massive losses were to be expected in this dangerous environment, but that's what follow on forces are for, at Fulda the US Army stationed armoured regiments whose sole mission was to block the valley route to Frankfurt with the wreckage of all their tanks if need be.

Not in the magnitude that FPV and recon drones have changed battelfield. In cold war you had good change to mask your movements. Worst case you were detected and few attack helicopters could try to intercept and cause some losses. But for that you had air defence, etc. ATGM, etc had limited range and view. Enemy could then try to mass their own ground forces to intecept but it took time, etc. 

Now when ("frontline" is under constant drone surveillance, if you destroy one new is sended to area immediately) you are detected enemy can throw tens of drones against single vehicle and you really cannot hide from them anymore. Drone teams are very easy and fast to move around (way faster than any mechanized unit). Nowdays whole frontline up to 75km deep is pretty transparent for both sides so surprises and deep manouvering thrusts have become almost impossible (only very small groups can infiltrate undetected... sometimes).

[Sinistar]

if somehow air defense is the answer you are not even seeing that around- since those are also threatened and are targets - whether they are fixed sites (threatened by drones and / or himars / iskander) or whether they are vehicles- you see those knocked out or withdrawn and withheld 

 

over time you see the gradual composition removing units which were not self propelled artillery, tanks,  IFVs or pcs (anything that can carry troops), and engineering vehicles

 

so everything was becoming more streamlined to fit those specific parameters

 

everything else disappeared- no more specialist or miscellaneous (bmpt-terminator) no more air defense vehicles, no more reconnaissance vehicles

 

the drones have all but replaced the recon units or threaten them or compete with several systems when combined with artillery or are the FPV type or can drop their loads: in massive numbers which still costs less resources than say a bmpt-terminator and so those become unnecessary and expensive liabilities

 

and the drones threaten the air defense vehicles themselves and / or their supply trains

or they simply can be replaced faster than any system which shoots them down and use a swarm strategy against something like that

 

from an algortihmic standpoint the success / loss ratios favor the drones- even a 90 percent drone loss rate outperforms much more expensive manned vehicles, systems and their resupply

 

so if it was not a tank, artillery or does not carry and deliver troops or does not recover and tow vehicles or dig fighting positions then you were not seeing it

 

then over time even those seem to be mostly vanishing or withheld and it is reduced to infantry riding in civilian vehicles most of the time

 

since you hear repeatedly from either side that the rear areas are within range and are under constant surveillance or attack it would not be easy to bring an AFV sized air defense vehicle up to the front or transferred around since even those are seen well behind the contact line and are targeted 

 

i watched a battle in pokrovsk the other day and the drone attacks are constant and non-stop- the infantry are basically pinned in a building and within seconds wave after wave of drones and the combination of artillery saturating the battlefield could not be more apparent- every 10 seconds you either hear a drone buzzing around before exploding or incoming artillery before that explodes and the troops are suppressed and cannot leave the relative protection of their building

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2025 by Sinistar

[Sinistar]

to add: when you watch how the drones are prepared and are pre=positioned on the ground or in a tree or in a building then you see how they generally outmaneuver the detection or engagement envelopment of everything else

 

 

they can sit and wait somewhere with their cameras running until the operators decide to move them

so they are not easily detected or fired upon while the defending units are already seen and tracked

 

then they can take off and suddenly these units are coming under attack from unexpected directions - from behind or from the top or the sides or take low passes on them where you would assume is problematic for their effective killing zone - say for example a weapon that cannot fire below the horizon because of mechanical limits or some other practical reason

[Martineleca]

On 11/1/2025 at 7:38 PM, MiGG0 said:

Effective EW has been relatively short ranged so imo not that effective against recon drones.

Drones are also becoming increasingly short ranged, I've read that recently due to extensive jamming over half of all drones in the field are controlled by cable. Forcing the enemy force to limit the operational parameters of its own munitions is certainly a step in the right direction for the defense...

[MiGG0]

1 hour ago, Martineleca said:

Drones are also becoming increasingly short ranged, I've read that recently due to extensive jamming over half of all drones in the field are controlled by cable. Forcing the enemy force to limit the operational parameters of its own munitions is certainly a step in the right direction for the defense...

No, their range has just increased. There are drone strikes tens of kilometers behind the line. Fiber is just used to their immunity to EW, but normal are still used with frequency hopping, etc. EW is effective against those, buy there still always are drone that get thru. There just are so many of them.

[Sinistar]

despite the baffling missteps the speed at which the conflict evolves is often still portrayed as an illusion or a fluke or the front is stalemated and at least one of the parties is inept

 

as you see the drones taking over and changing virtually every other system or changing their behaviors or causing them to evolve or remove themselves altogether there was still the dismissal of much of it as if it were just the feature of actors which lacked the depth or the capabilities to do much else

 

ignoring the symptoms of what was going on and the warning signs - how the battles were being conducted or were not producing the predicted results 

 

insert challenger / abrams / leopard tanks and bradleys into the mix and that will do it as if for some reason those vehicles would be somehow immune to the primary killer of t-72 / t-80 / t-90 tanks: drones, artillery and mines combined

 

still there were repeated attempts at large scale operations until both sides finally understood and got the message

the two parties right now which have the most experience and the most understanding of what it is are russia and ukraine

you still often see the excuses or the beliefs that it is a fluke and that it would not happen this way with a professional modern state 

 

this is not to say that it will not change again

but that changes can happen both ways very quickly

the speed at which you see one solution met with its opposite and vice versa

 the drones too evolved by necessity and work in combination with artillery, missiles, guided bombs, minefields and early warning sensors where both sides have them

then much like donated equipment from nato did not significantly change anything it is simply a bet that what is needed is some ace in the hole solution which insinuated into it which will overcome the drones but which would not be itself exposed to the multi-layered overlapping threats

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Martineleca]

On 10/30/2025 at 12:37 PM, Mighty_Zuk said:

Yeah I don't see that happening, sorry.

Why do you think that, if compared to the planned purchases of the nearest large NATO ground force Poland will be getting over a thousand Borsuk units and 700 Ratel heavy IFVs that are supposedly an equivalent of the German Puma, so not unrealistic at all considering the stated amount of mobile firepower that needs to be raised...

[Mighty_Zuk]

33 minutes ago, Martineleca said:

Why do you think that, if compared to the planned purchases of the nearest large NATO ground force Poland will be getting over a thousand Borsuk units and 700 Ratel heavy IFVs that are supposedly an equivalent of the German Puma, so not unrealistic at all considering the stated amount of mobile firepower that needs to be raised...

Because there's basically the Lynx for that. Puma is tailored for the Bundeswehr, but the Lynx is made from the ground up for export. There are also other available options like the CV90, AS21 etc, which are also more customizable per customer.

[Martineleca]

2 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Because there's basically the Lynx for that. Puma is tailored for the Bundeswehr, but the Lynx is made from the ground up for export.

It's also just a wider reaching deal offered by a huge conglomerate, the offer of industrial entanglements that KNDS can hardly compete with is also too good to pass up for most customers, for instance I think Hungary will remain the only country that operates both the Lynx IFV and Leopard tank which it had ordered earlier. Italy's Leonardo partnership with Rheinmetall led to them selecting Lynx and then inevitably Panther, the company is also building new ammunition/gunpowder plants in Romania and Bulgaria which will probably push both into also procuring Lynx/Panther and this may be the blueprint going forward.

[Martineleca]

On 11/1/2025 at 5:49 PM, Ssnake said:

...until the resurgence of AAA will completely change the picture to something that might resemble the status quo ante a bit more, again.

The commitment to purchase around 600 Skyrangers which is 50% more units for maneuver brigades than they previously had Gepards certainly reveals a desire to accomplish just that, though with so much crucial infrastructure such as airports seemingly coming under threat it's intriguing if this system will see ever wider use potentially on cheaper truck or static platforms.

[Ssnake]

Of course, Rheinmetall also offers Skyranger turrets on fixed installations, but I remain skeptical if we're going to see them installed on airports. At the current threat level, at least, I'd expect more "soft interception" CUAS (like the one by Argus Interception) to be dispersed in the vicinity of selected critical infrastructure sites. Less problematic during peacetime, and you can do forensics on a captured drone rather than sift through debris fields.

[Josh]

2 hours ago, Martineleca said:

The commitment to purchase around 600 Skyrangers which is 50% more units for maneuver brigades than they previously had Gepards certainly reveals a desire to accomplish just that, though with so much crucial infrastructure such as airports seemingly coming under threat it's intriguing if this system will see ever wider use potentially on cheaper truck or static platforms.

The U.S. has a palletized system called LIDS; I would expect Germany to do the same.

[Ssnake]

I don't think we'll see AAA with hot guns stationed for point defense around German airports (but then again, I didn't expect them elsewhere in Europe, and here we are). For that to change, the (perceived) threat level probably needs to rise a few notches. As mentioned, the CUAS from Argus Interception are the perfect instrument for peacetime intervention, possibly coupled with some form of jammers. Ideally you want to capture offending drones intact for forensic investigation. You'd have to have rather frequent interruptions of airport operations to entertain the thought of shooting them down, especially if it's army-operated equipment (and I don't see the German police getting 30mm AAA guns by the dozens - or the airport operator companies). Separation of the military and law enforcement is even strictert than in the US (Posse Comitatus allows at least for an override from the US president; in Germany it'd require an act of parliament).