In the study presented below, analytical company Shephard's Defense Insight presents its view on the paradigm shift of global confrontation
After nearly two decades of military stabilization and counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Western military has begun to change its views and pay more attention to confrontation with almost equal rivals, such as China and Russia.
In recent hostilities, the United States and its allies have been conducting operations against guerrilla warriors by superior airborne, dominant electromagnetic spectrum and state-of-the-art platforms and weapons. The pace of operations was low-intensity, well-defended but lighter force units were used, and the overwhelming use of forces on the ground, in the air or at sea was not required.
However, an almost equal competitor will use platforms and systems that are equal if not superior in capabilities. That is, air superiority cannot be guaranteed, operational space will be contested at all levels and any conflict that may arise is likely to be of high intensity with a rapid exchange of strikes in order to neutralize enemy combat formations.
Increasing the intensity
China and Russia have used the past decade to modernize their armed forces to conduct short-term and concentrated, high-intensity offensive operations. Jack Watling of the Royal Joint Institute for Defense Research noted that there are three main evolving threats that affect the ground component. First, the deployment of more advanced integrated air defense systems is of great importance to the West, since 80% of NATO's offensive capabilities are provided by the air force.
"At the moment, most of their firepower is directed towards attempts to break through the air defense system," Watling said. This means that vulnerable air logistics and transport platforms can be used to deploy materiel and manpower in a theater of operations only far from the area of operations. He stressed that this affects the ground sector, since "the ability of the West to quickly transfer a large number of troops to a given area has deteriorated."
The second concern is that opponents are adopting surface-to-air missiles, artillery systems and technologies that provide long-range precision fire. This could force NATO to keep the supply chain and combat support away from the area of operations - up to 500 km.
“It is very difficult to create fuel and ammunition reserves in the area where the conflict is taking place. This means that you cannot maintain a large force there until you neutralize high-precision long-range systems."
The third problem is that China and Russia are modernizing their ground forces in terms of main tanks, artillery and other highly effective weapons. Since any area of operation is likely to be close to their national borders, within their own country, they will be able to build up forces and resources much faster and they will need to cover less distance to enter into combat contact with an opponent, and therefore they can easily surpass those of the West. forces in such war zones.
The Chinese National Liberation Army (PLA) is also being reformed, moving away from excessive dependence on armored forces and moving to a more expeditionary structure with brigades equipped with lighter vehicles and weapons. These new formations with tanks, medium armored vehicles and the necessary logistics forces and means will be able to act independently in order to create problems for any serious opponent. As part of these reforms, the PLA is replacing its obsolete Type 59 tanks with new MBTs, including the ZTZ-99 and ZTZ-96.
Tank transformation
In Russia, which borders both Europe and China, a new T-14 Armata tank is being developed, which causes concern in NATO countries, because according to the declared characteristics, it surpasses all existing Allied tanks. Although the tank is still at the stage of manufacturing an initial batch, its existence, along with the plans of the Russian army to modernize part of the fleet from 350 T-90A MBTs to the T-90M standard (with a larger caliber cannon like the one installed on the T-14) is evidence strengthening armored forces, which as a result can turn into an even more serious threat on the battlefield.
For their part, Western armies must modernize to meet these specific threats. In order to prevent the superiority of Russian armored vehicles, many in the West have rushed in the past few years to develop, purchase and modernize heavy armored vehicles.
Germany began to receive the modernized Leopard 2A7V MBT, as well as improve the Leopard 2A6 / A6M variants in order to avoid obsolescence. For its part, the UK is developing a new concept of the Challenger 2 MBT, optimized for urban space, and is implementing a service life extension program in order to modernize the fleet of tanks and avoid their obsolescence.
Meanwhile, France and Germany have also launched a joint project MGCS (Main Ground Combat System), in which a new European MBT will be developed by 2035 to replace the Leclerc and Leopard 2 tanks.
Ukraine, which is on the front line of confrontation with Russia, in order to strengthen the combat power of its ground forces brought its MBT Oplot to mass production, removed obsolete T-84 tanks from storage, modernized its T-64BV and, finally, presented a prototype of the T- 84-120 Yatagan.
Finland took delivery of 100 Leopard 2A6 tanks from the presence of the Dutch army. Poland will modernize 142 Leopard 2A4 tanks to the 2PL standard, as well as 300 obsolete Soviet-era T-72M tanks along with the RT-91 model, until the new MBT is delivered under the Wilk program. The Czech Republic is also upgrading its 33 T-72M4CZ tanks and receiving 44 Leopard 2A7 MBTs; at the same time, Romania plans to replace the existing TR-85 systems with Leopard 2 tanks along with Cyprus, Greece and Spain as part of a joint European defense project.
Too far?
But increasing the number and capabilities of advanced weapons is just one piece of the puzzle. Watling said that even if the number of MBTs rises sharply, countries like the UK lack the ability to maintain or service them over long distances and can only do so at great expense, given the necessary additional engineering and transportation means.
“More importantly, all of these logistics assets, when deployed forward, will be really vulnerable to long-range artillery,” he added. Armored formations and their support train will be targeted by long-range firepower, and this is one area, according to Watling, where the West is really lagging behind.
"It's more about the availability of capabilities that allow me to destroy a significant part of my opponent's most important assets - his ammunition depots and supply routes - in fact, without necessarily participating in a massive general battle."
That is, it does not matter how many tanks Russia has, because if long-range fire weapons can destroy the fuel and lubricants warehouse, they will simply stand up. It is easier to deal with standing tanks, as a result, the inequality of forces in a certain way loses its sharpness and becomes less important.
Until the long-range artillery counter-battery battle is won, it is unlikely that armored forces will be able to move closer to engage. Any side that is left with such long-range weapons after the initial exchanges of blows is likely to win the battle by being able to target advancing armored formations unhindered.
Maneuverable armored units, however, are essential for the development of fire impact, since the use of artillery alone would mean that both sides would be involved in a scenario like the First World War, when entrenched troops sat in front of each other for months, unable to change position or go on the attack.
Watling said that mobile armored units are increasingly based on mid-range vehicles with STANAG Level 4-6 protection, which have lower armoring rates compared to heavy MBTs, but higher compared to overly vulnerable light vehicles. He explained that the driver of this trend is that the existing missiles and their homing heads "will quite reliably immobilize tanks and therefore the mass of armor that you currently need to protect against these missiles is simply unbearable."
Mobile forces
In order to better prepare for a future conflict with an almost equal rival, the French and British armies are developing combat formations equipped with medium-weight armored vehicles in accordance with their Scorpion and Strike concepts. Speaking at DSEI 2019, a British Army spokesman said Strike is a "transformational opportunity" that will offer a balance of fire efficiency, mobility, survivability and combat resilience, giving more expeditionary options to policymakers. "The Strike Brigade will also be lighter and more mobile than motorized infantry, but it will have more integrated firepower than light units."
Future British Strike brigades will be equipped with new Ajax reconnaissance vehicles and Boxer armored personnel carriers. He explained that they will act as a combined and combined arms force, will be able to operate at operational distance and "use information in real time from all networked ground and air platforms and then transmit information to soldiers on the ground … to those who need it." …
New strike brigades will be able to quickly deploy beyond the reach of enemy weapons and then rapidly attack their positions, with networking and a high level of communication interaction becoming one of the main factors in increasing their capabilities. He noted that the army "will not only be able to operate in a densely populated, complex and contested urban space, but also disperse when necessary to be unpredictable for the adversary."
France is following the same path with its Scorpion ground forces modernization program,according to which the firepower and mobility of existing platforms will be improved and new wheeled armored vehicles Jaguar and Griffon will be adopted, and they will all be combined into a single stable network.
Armored units must avoid what Watling describes as "lethal attention" by long-range artillery units, which today can afford improved situational awareness, use unmanned systems, and are highly automated to speed up the attack process. When detected by the enemy, the unit can be attacked by missiles and artillery in almost real time. The West needs to create such capabilities in order to guarantee an advantage in the fire confrontation and not to jeopardize its combat units.
Russia is actively developing its long-range firepower, including the development of the 9A52-4 Tornado MLRS with a range of 120 km, which is a noticeable increase over the previous version, which could barely reach 70 km. In addition, in 2019, a new 120-mm self-propelled gun 2С42 Lotus, intended for the airborne troops, was shown.
Shoot further
When firing from artillery systems at a distance of more than 40 km, the circular probable deviation increases due to the slightest changes in wind speed or direction when aiming the gun, which cannot be ruled out. This means that to neutralize the target, either more shells must be fired, or a high-precision system must be used, but both of these methods have their advantages and disadvantages. The use of significantly more ammunition increases the logistics burden in terms of storage and transport, but adding high-precision systems is also too expensive.
“No one is going to have huge arsenals of firepower that can actually fire at great distances,” Watling said. The problem with neutralizing targets at long ranges is that there will never be enough rounds to suppress any defensive system. Meanwhile, traditional shorter-range artillery is inexpensive and can penetrate defenses, but these systems are unable to get close enough to the enemy, since if they move forward, they will become vulnerable to high-precision fire at long range.
“A tiered effect is created when one side tries to force the other to use up its arsenals of precision-guided munitions faster. After using them, you can push your traditional artillery forward and start pushing back these defensive systems,”added Watling. "In high-intensity conflicts, the war is largely won at the operational level, where the results and resource consumption are compared, as a result, the need for tactical exchanges is significantly reduced."
In The Future of Artillery: Maximizing the Tactical and Operational Fire Power of the British Army, Watling outlined how the UK needs to respond to key developments. These include: an expanded line of ammunition, the use of ammunition with an active seeker, the use of multiple sensors, and improved defensive measures.
He believes that the West is nominally ahead in almost all of these technologies, but they are still mostly in the development or initial testing phase, and the operating systems need updating. As an example, he named the British Army's 155-mm AS90 self-propelled howitzer, "which is a good system, but, unfortunately, with a barrel of 39 calibers," that is, it has a range of only 24 km compared to the modern Russian counterpart with a range of 48 km all other things being equal.
Tiered fire
In March 2019, the British Army issued a request for information as part of a program to replace the AS90 howitzer with a new artillery system by the mid-2020s. In this regard, the Ministry of Defense replied: “The future multi-tier artillery capabilities are part of the Future Weapons Strategy (released in September 2018). A single fleet of 155mm 52-caliber artillery platforms (MFP) will support Strike's motorized infantry and strike brigades. 105-mm artillery, therefore, will remain as a means of very high readiness."
Looking ahead, Watling noted that long-range solutions beyond 2030 will require a comparative cost analysis of highly interoperable solutions. Continuous development of precision strike systems will enable a full assessment of combat effectiveness and investment in current and planned ground capabilities. This will guarantee the defeat of mobile armored targets at a distance of at least 60 km.
According to Watling, the German armed forces have decided to install a 60-caliber barrel on their PzH 2000 self-propelled howitzers, which will then surpass anything the Russians have. “The technology is in our hands,” he said. "Although the West has the technology, it did not actually deploy it because artillery capabilities were not a priority."
Now that the focus is again on high-intensity conflict, NATO is very keen to bring long-range artillery to the top of its priority list. However, defense budgets are not particularly responsive to these trends, so here it will be necessary to make difficult and compromise decisions about the priority of financing programs for the development of artillery systems.
Allied works
The 2010 agreement between France and the UK gave impetus to joint cooperation on integrated weapons systems; the next steps will be the development of artillery systems in support of the French and British programs Scorpion and Strike, respectively. In a high-intensity conflict, France and the UK are expected to work closely together and deploy large artillery forces as allies in Eastern Europe, especially in regions such as the Baltic states.
Other countries of the Alliance, such as Poland, are seriously developing their artillery capabilities, mainly for defensive purposes, and it is unlikely that they will deploy their forces outside national borders. In addition, for political reasons, Germany does not promote heavy artillery as a priority.
Watling suggested that Germany's contribution would likely be in the provision of transportation and air defenses, which would be "critical" in any future conflict. He said that transportation is a huge problem, since the transfer of equipment and weapons from west to east, especially from the United States, is possible only through Germany, since most of the ports and railways are located on its territory and without it this process can hardly be feasible.
He warned that “there are currently enough trains in Germany to transport about one and a half armored brigades at a time, which could actually slow down the transfer and deployment. Therefore, increasing the number of rolling stock and providing protection against air and cyber threats will be a really useful contribution.”
In different European countries, activities of various scales are being actively pursued to increase firepower. Denmark has bought four more Caesar howitzers, increasing their number to 19, while the Czech Ministry of Defense wants to replace its Dana guns with new 155mm self-propelled artillery mounts and is purchasing 27 PzH2000 howitzers from the German company KMW. Sweden plans to equip three of its artillery divisions with new howitzers in 2021-2025 in order to improve support for mechanized brigades, which will complement the Archer wheeled self-propelled guns in operation.
In the meantime, Belgium has officially announced the need for a new self-propelled system with increased range, while Poland is buying from the US MLRS HIMARS (High-Mobility Artillery Rocket System).
In the United States itself, the Army Tactical Missile System fleet is also increasing. In addition, the Pentagon is upgrading the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System, which will increase the range of the complex from 70 to 150 km.
Deep blow
Looking ahead, the US Army is funding research and development to meet its future needs for precision long-range systems. The new DeepStrike surface-to-surface missile is designed to engage targets at ranges from 60 to 500 km; it is fired from the existing HIMARS and M270 launchers. The army is also actively developing ground platforms for hypersonic weapons, having issued contracts for the development of systems of universal hypersonic warheads Common-Hypersonic Glide Body and hypersonic missiles Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon.
The LRPF CFT interindustry group, organized by the American army, is implementing several projects, including the development of a 155-mm projectile with an XM1113 jet accelerator, which will increase the range of guns to 40 km, and a new extended range artillery system ERCA (Extended Range Cannon Artillery), which will be able to send shell XM1113 at 70 km. The ERCA system will be installed on the existing self-propelled howitzers of the American army M109A7, and its turret with a 39-caliber cannon will be replaced by a turret with a 58-caliber cannon.
The LRPF CFT is one of six teams dedicated to addressing power disparities across the military. Nevertheless, the army believes that this alone is clearly not enough for modernization.
“Based on historical experience, for effective modernization, you have to start from scratch and develop a concept of how you want to fight, how you want to organize the battle, and determine what resources are needed for this. This is a pillar road - we want to take an integrated approach”, - noted Watling.
By 2028, the American army wants to be fully prepared for a real clash in Europe, and the main thing here is the ability to carry out joint operational control in all areas - on land, at sea and in the air. Its next goal should be achieved in 2035, by which time the army should be able to conduct operations in all elements, which will allow its units to feel confidently in the realities of a high-intensity conflict.
The Center for Advanced Concepts of the American Army is conducting research to determine what is necessary to unconditionally achieve the above goals. It is necessary to understand and make a decision about which units should be ahead and in which zones of responsibility, and which ones should be rapidly deployable, expeditionary, but at the same time capable of conducting active combat operations.
“The main thing is that in a real confrontation with our rivals, the West needs to take an active position rather than rely on passive deterrence. It requires coordination with allies and partners who are at the forefront and oppose Russia and China on a daily basis."
Ultimately, any high-intensity confrontation is likely to develop out of a non-military situation, such as a trade war, with the United States leading the Western response to Russian and Chinese encroachments. Since a future war with a near-equal opponent is likely to be short, with rapid engagement, and overwhelming firepower (especially on the ground), decisions about which forces to push forward and which will provide a second wave of expeditionary type (and who will provide them) are key. …
As Western countries are engaged in the modernization of their armed forces, it is very important that they do it in conjunction with the alliance in order to maximize budget allocations and maximize overall capabilities. Otherwise, disunited forces with insufficient capabilities will end up in second place in a high-intensity fire battle, which will have very sad consequences.
