USVs as Anti-Access Weapons

A2/AD is more than a marketing slogan in sea warfare

Unmanned surface vessels used as suicide weapons to attack ships at sea or in port are the rage these days. But they are an evolutionary weapon. Say it with me again: “It’s not a silver bullet weapon.”

This author sees unmanned surface vessels (USVs) as nothing radically new:

Non-traditional sea denial is simply the next evolution of the sea mines I saw back in Portsmouth.

Ukraine, which does not have any remaining warships, has disabled or sunk around two dozen Russian ships on the Black Sea using kamikaze boats laden with explosives. It is a tactical weapon which has had strategic implications.

And let me just say I have total respect for how the author digresses in that article.

The implication noted is Ukraine's successful defense of its grain exports through the Black Sea.

I viewed the USV as an evolution of the spar-torpedo boat. Which was an evolution of the floating torpedo--the old name for mines which self-propelled torpedoes took over in time.

And keep in mind that to be effective, the USV needs intelligence, surveillance, and targeting information that NATO largely provides Ukraine. So talk of how “cheap” these new weapons are in comparison to anti-ship missiles fails to consider that factor.

Yet the destruction of about two dozen Russian ships—not all by USVs—shows the limits of the weapon. That toll was inflicted in a war getting close to the third anniversary. Not exactly a Marianas Turkey Shoot scale of concentrated destruction.

That limitation highlights my judgment that Ukraine didn't deny Russia access to the western Black Sea where it could halt Ukraine's exports. Ukraine made the cost of operating out there too high for any success Russia could obtain by gaining access to the region. If Russia had an objective worth losing a number of ships, Russia could push in and operate there. I don't know what that mission would be right now, but it would be possible.

I mean, in theory if a ceasefire was planned to go into effect at a date and time, Russia might launch an airmobile and amphibious assault in the Odessa region to stake out some key terrain. Whether Ukraine would just accept that kind of smash-and-grab operation would be the question. I suspect Ukraine would counter-attack past the ceasefire date to deny Russia success in such a ploy. But who knows?

But I digress.

Anyway, this issue highlights the somewhat obscure—and ill-defined in usage—concept of anti-access/areas denial (A2/AD) weapons. Normally used to describe China's strategy to keep the United States Navy away from China's coast, America and its allies are turning the tables on China with plans to ring China with similar weapons.

The best definition of the term I have come across called anti-access the capability of increasing the cost of an enemy entering a sea area. Area denial prevents an enemy from entering a sea area. The AD is possible at shorter ranges where many more weapons can be trained on the enemy than in the A2 region.

USVs are another weapon to be integrated with existing weapons--including the basic sea mine which lacks the NEW AND IMPROVED—NOW WITH TAIL FINS! vibe of USVs.

Don't fling your panties at them.

NOTE: I made the image with Bing.