TANKS OR DRONES?

          Tactical aerial drones have conquered the battlefield. Literally. There is no need to elaborate, as it is all common knowledge. The battlefield has become transparent. Any movement stands a high chance of being detected, especially when it comes to heavy assets (tanks, armored personnel carriers, heavy artillery pieces, machinery, etc.). And upon these, swarms of kamikaze drones swoop down, putting them out of action. Sometimes with ease, other times with difficulty, but as a rule, they damage or even destroy them. This is why the tank has become a secondary weapon on the battlefield in Ukraine. It is used during severe weather conditions, when drones cannot fly, but most often, as mobile artillery. This is exactly what caused a deadlock: large-scale offensive operations are no longer possible. Because there is no longer the possibility of concentrating large armored forces to break through the front line. Is this the end of the tank? At this point, tactical drones appear to be the ultimate weapon on the battlefield. And the tank no longer stands a chance. And it is not just the tank. This is why the defense industry in the West and the US has pivoted primarily toward drones. It is a natural shift. Based on the lessons learned from the actions in Ukraine, this is the correct direction. Huge sums have been invested in research and production. Retrained specialists, specialized training courses, testing equipment, dedicated testing facilities and proving grounds, retooled production lines, established supply chains, and so much more. Overhauling industrial production is no simple task. This takes some years. Of course, the profits are matching, as the armed forces are procuring drones on a massive scale. This comes to the detriment of tanks and other heavy combat assets, which have lost their primary role in combat. Of course, their production continues, but at a low level, since the investments are no longer worth it. The images of Russian tanks damaged or even destroyed by drones say it all. Money must flow toward drone production. 

          The trend is clear and correct, looking strictly through the lens of the present. But we should also take a look at history.

          The submarine was widely used as a weapon in the First World War. Particularly by the Germans, who inflicted massive losses on the Allied transport fleet. Thus, throughout the entire duration of the war, the Germans sank 6,394 ships, while losing 229 submarines[1]. And this was despite the fact that the submarine did not possess impressive technical-tactical characteristics, its submerged time being quite short and its onboard weaponry insufficiently developed.

          Peace came. The submarine was forgotten. But not by the Germans.

The effects of German submarine actions during the first part of World War II are well known. Documentaries on this topic, presented by some television networks, are very interesting. The losses inflicted on the Allies in the Atlantic were huge. The aspects of the confrontation between German submarines and Allied naval forces are fairly well known. However, starting in 1943, the efficiency of the operations carried out by the German submarine fleet decreased considerably. In 1944, its losses were very high: January – 14 submarines (and 8 Allied ships sunk); February: 15 submarines (and 4 Allied ships sunk); March: 17 submarines (11 Allied ships sunk)[2]. Four years earlier, in March 1940, the ratio was 43 Allied ships to 1 sunk submarine[3]. German losses grew higher and higher, starting in 1943. In 1945, this branch of the German Navy had an insignificant impact on military operations. The most important aspect to mention: German submarines failed to prevent the Allied invasions of Europe in 1943 (Sicily) and 1944 (Normandy). Why? Because, starting in 1942, the Allies implemented innovative anti-submarine technologies in their naval forces: high-performance sonars, radars, long-range aircraft, SIGINT systems, etc. And the submarine is, by its very nature, highly vulnerable. Its power lies in invisibility, when it hides in the deep. But if it is detected, its chances of survival drop dramatically. Counter weapons were found. Why wasn't this done during the interwar period? Were the investments not worth it?

           The conclusion is that, although the danger posed by submarines was already known from the period of the First World War, no measures were taken during the interwar period, not even when it was clear that another war with Germany would begin. German submarines once again caught the British fleet by surprise in the autumn of 1939. Practically, the Germans had freedom of movement because the Allies ignored the need to prepare for anti-submarine warfare. The price paid was high.

Drones have been used in armed conflicts for over 40 years. The use of tactical drones intensified during the civil war in Donbas. But nobody paid attention, except for the Ukrainian forces.

The tactical aerial drone is, by its very nature, highly vulnerable. Because it has reduced dimensions and is made of lightweight materials, generally plastics. A single mechanical impulse disables it. It can be shot down with a slingshot, literally. Why are these drones dangerous? Due to their speed, surprise appearance, and large numbers. And due to the absence of generalized and effective countermeasure systems. All kinds of countermeasures have been developed, but none have been widespread enough. Research is ongoing.

Just as effective systems were developed against submarines, reducing their attack capabilities, I am convinced that identification and countermeasure systems will also be developed against tactical drones, significantly reducing their efficiency on the battlefield. They will not eliminate them definitively; drones will still remain an effective weapon under certain conditions. But they will no longer be supreme, "game-changer" weapons. And I am convinced that tanks and other heavy equipment will reclaim their place on the battlefield, only adapted, both technically and tactically, to yet another new anti-tank weapon: the tactical drone. And the massive investments in industry and the changes in technological processes (for tactical drone production) will be written off as losses, for the most part. And this will happen when we see large-scale offensive operations, involving major armored units, that will break through strong defensive lines and resume maneuver warfare. Meanwhile, the European and American defense industries, with their huge production of drones, will not be able to ensure the resumption of armored vehicle production at the required level. I do not think it will be long before that moment arrives.

---

[1] ‘Submarines and Submarine Warfare’, International Encyclopedia of the First World War, accessed September 16, 2026, https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/submarines_and_submarine_warfare.

[2] ‘German U-Boats at War, Part 5 of 6’, Naval History, accessed September 16, 2026, https://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignsUboats5.htm.

[3] ‘German U-Boats at War, Part 1 of 6’, Naval History, accessed September 16, 2026, https://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignsUboats5.htm.