Small drones are rewriting the rules of infantry warfare. They can attack in ways which were previously impossible, turning safe spaces into death traps.
‘Digging in’ has been an essential part of taking up defensive positions for more than a century. As firepower evolved in the 19th century infantry went from close-packed rows to dispersing and taking cover. By WWI the only way to survive intense artillery and machine gun fire was by digging trenches.
Defenses have not changed much since then. A soldier from the Western Front in 1916 would feel at home in the trenches of Ukraine in 2024, surprised only by the solar panels and smartphones. But, as President Zelensky has noted, this is not just WW1 trench warfare but “World War 1 with drones, — and the drones have changed everything.
Digging Deeper
On taking a position, the first thing a foot soldier does is use their entrenching tool to dig a shell scrape, a hole deep enough to hide in and protect against direct fire and shrapnel. This can be expanded into a foxhole, a one-person fighting position deep enough to stand up in.
With more time and help from engineering equipment, the defensive position can be expanded into a trench system. This is deep enough to move around in without being exposed. A firing step on one side allows soldiers to look over the edge and scan enemy lines. The network will combine fighting positions, emplacements for heavy weapons such as machine guns, communications lines, storage and rest areas. The trench may be camouflaged, and some sections have overhead cover.
Trench systems typically have underground bunkers or dugouts with reinforced roofing which are robust enough to withstand artillery fire.
Drones have made many of these defensive measures obsolete and in some cases dangerous. Drop drones, consumer quadcopters fitted with a mechanism to drop one or more grenades, can drop bombs with extreme accuracy from an altitude of a few hundred feet. Any soldier in a foxhole may have dug their own grave.
FPVs can dive vertically into defensive positions, and anti-drone netting now seems to be universal in trenches on both sides. Plenty of overhead cover is also incorporated to give protection against drop drones.
However, the situation has changes most with previously safe bunkers and dugouts.
Drones Versus Dugouts
In the absence of effective drone jamming, drone bombers can keep coming back. A bunker typically has a reinforced roof covered by thick logs to provide structural support and absorb blast, with earth heaped on top. One video shows a Ukrainian bomber repeatedly hitting the same Russian bunker, gradually blasting the earth cover away, damaging the logs until a gap appears, until the operator can drop bombs into the space below. The occupants likely had time to withdraw before the bunker was destroyed, but their position was compromised and anything stored there destroyed.
FPV attacks are more sudden and decisive. A video shared by OSINT analyst Andrew Perpetua in August shows Russian retreating into an underground complex with four entrances. An FPV flies into the main entrance and explodes. The blast blows smoke out of the other entrances, indicating that the entire underground space is affected. This is followed by a series of FPV attacks targeting each of the entrances in turn until all of them have collapsed. Any survivors will be trapped inside.
Heavy attack FPVs, with a payload of 6 pounds or more of explosive, typically carry out these attacks, rather than the lighter version with 3-pound RPG
Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF
High precision means they can easily fly into a bunker entrance, and the FPVs close-up view means the operator can locate entrances which are sheltered and invisible from above.
Some have suggested that the defenders would be safe if the bunker had a door. However, a door just absorbs the first one or two FPV strikes before the defenses are cracked open. A heavy armored door might be buckled by blast, or welded shut by thermite munitions, making it more of a hazard than a help.
Busting Bigger Bunkers
Small drones are effective even against the best-prepared defensive positions. One of Ukraine’s biggest successes at the start of the Kurst offensive was the capture of an underground bunker complex, described as “ sprawling, concrete and well-fortified company stronghold “ with the surrender of over a hundred Russians.
A video posted by drone fundraiser Serhii Sternenko shows repeated drone attacks on the complex entrances.
“This made it possible to suppress enemy resistance and safely approach the stronghold,” notes Sternenko. “The captives said that they did not like it very much.”
Previously this type of attack meant sending in foot soldiers to get close enough for hand grenades and demolition charges. Now the explosives can be delivered with the same precision by drone operators from several miles away, at no personal risk. If one drone is lost, several more will follow.
It is also interesting to note that the spectacular ‘dragon drone’ attacks spraying thermite incendiary onto Russian positions may not just be about burning away cover. Video from a Russian solder of the aftermath of a thermite drone attack shows that it had burned holes in their trench’s anti-drone netting in several places, potentially making them vulnerable.
Large numbers of small drones make much of the previous received wisdom redundant. This is a new form of warfare and new tactics are needed. This has happened before. Rapid-firing breech loading rifles cut down the massed infantry formations of the early 19th century and forces them to disperse. Artillery and machine guns made infantry in the open vulnerable in WW1, and earthworks were needed for survival. Drones may require a similarly significant shift in tactics.
