Basic lesson
Saw an interesting essay on how the Ukraine War is forcing a rethink of western, specifically US, dedication to perfect, do anything weapons systems.
Among the growing number of defense companies recognizing this shift is Robin Radar, a Dutch company that makes drone-detection radar systems used by Ukraine and US allies in the Middle East. Kristian Brost, general manager for Robin Radar USA, told B-17 that an imperfect answer “right now, sometimes, is better than a perfect solution later.”
He said there is “a lot we can learn” from Ukraine, which is “in a spot where sometimes they need duct tape and rubber bands.” And, he continued, “I think that’s in itself a lesson: Use what works, use what is cheap.”
He said that while the exquisite weaponry the US loves to build shouldn’t disappear, “we’ve got to get real and just get stuff that works and get it into hands, get people trained, because something even at 80% is better than nothing.”
Ever seen a T-34 tank? A Jeep? An SKS? None of them are perfect and all have significant flaws… but they won wars. Because getting something “good enough” in numbers to troops is better than getting a million-dollar perfect weapon to them too late to do any good. (Do the numbers F-35 come to mind?)
The US and its allies, for instance, are increasingly interested in Ukrainian-style interceptor drones to counter drones instead of relying on expensive air-defense missiles.
Not sure how many billion-dollar Patriot launchers/missiles we have sent over to Ukraine? You know how long it takes for a Patriot to be built? Versus those interceptor drones?
It’s a key area where companies should not wait for perfection, Brost said. “Especially when it comes to arguably one of the biggest gaps in US defense right now. We got to get gear out there, even if it’s not perfect, because we too can learn.”
The company is still making advanced weaponry and wants high performance, but it also wants systems that are more affordable, scalable, and adaptable than traditional Western gear.
Ukraine’s defense industry has presented similar warnings. Serhiy Goncharov, the CEO of the National Association of Ukrainian Defense Industries, which represents about 100 Ukrainian companies, previously told B-17 that in a long war, the West’s focus on having smaller numbers of advanced equipment isn’t the right approach. It needs mass quantities of “good enough” weapons. B17 News
Lot of folks might argue that good right now is ‘way better than better too late to do any good.
Two thing come to mind – for instance, that in WWII Germany was technologically superior in some ways with V-1 and V-2s, the only jet fighters – and lost to sheer masses of Soviet and American arms. (I know that is a dubious comparison – the M-1 was indeed superior to the K-98, but the majority of German casualties were more due to Mosins than Garands, the Germans were never as mechanized as the US – but neither were the Soviets – you can cherry pick the comparisons all night.)
I will freely admit my thinking on this was influenced half a century ago by Arthur C. Clarke. If you have never read perhaps the greatest military science fiction story ever, well, here’s your chance – here’s Superiority.
Category: Science and Technology, Ukraine
Thanks for the memory recall of the AC Clarke story.
Indirect fire was the number one killer of German soldiers in World War 11, especially on the Eastern Front.
It is fair to say that if the Germans had developed the atomic bomb they would have won the war. It was a near thing too. They shot themselves in the foot early by excluding Jewish scientists. Then the allies went out of their way to disrupt and destroy the program at every turn from resistance fighters blowing up the heavy water factory in Norway to the Alsos Mission.
A super weapon can change the war, we saw as it greatly shortened the war in the Pacific. I think that may be where we got off track. It seemed like that after that we were always looking for the technological advantage as opposed to simply what worked.
A super weapon only works if you are willing to use it. The same is true of Russia. If they ever decided to nuke the Ukraine the war would be over in a day.
Or a flash
The “variable time fuse”, aka proximity fuse, for WW2 US artillery and Navy gunfire was the real “wonder weapon”.
We first used it on land during “the bulge “. It was as if we suddenly had 10x the guns. Perfect height airbursts, every single time, even in mountainous terrain, valleys, etc.
The other was the Deuce-and-a-half truck.
It would be nice if we bought less expensive but very capable weapon systems. I would like to see a smaller submarine which serves its purpose as a Hunter/Killer of other submarines and ships but here we are with the Virginia Class Submarines.
We buy these more expensive systems so Congress critters can bring home the bacon to their districts and Flag officers can get jobs after they retire.
I’d opine a mix of both–small AIP boats for costal/home shipping lanes defense, with VA and SSGN conversion boats (once the first four go away) for power projection.
We’ll never see the days of 145-150 boats again, but it beats the shit out of barely 50 fast boats and 14 boomers.
It was Patton that said a good plan executed violently is better than waiting for a perfect plan to form.
As to the drone situation, I’m waiting for some bright individual to resurrect some pre WW2 tech in planes. A nice stable recip prop plane capable of 250 MPH with a set of 30 cal MG’s in the wings or better yet nose for longer range focus would be a good drone killer. Minor radar capability to spot them at distance then bring the “fighter” into interception. 30 cal MGs for fast cyclic rate and economy over 50’s or canons. Less tech and lighter equipment than a mini gun.
Maybe something like this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Rockwell_OV-10_Bronco
Contractor will happily make them for $115 million a piece.
Crop dusters with hardpoints.
Great reading post David and as I scrolled down, My left thumb turned red and swelled up when I saw the M-1 Garand mentioned and the Brotherhood of the M-1 Thumb wept..See you later Alligator…
Slightly off topic, but this asshat needs a basic lesson in security. Mark “Foreskin” Kelly. Again. Arizona, we have to do better than this idiot:
https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2026/05/10/mark-kelly-remarks-about-depletion-of-weapons-n2202206#google_vignette
He didn’t seem too concerned about us emptying our weapons stockpile to supply Ukraine…….
Or leaving stuff behind in Afghanistan…..
But wait, there’s more!
https://twitchy.com/grateful-calvin/2026/05/11/mark-kelly-pulls-out-his-shovel-and-keeps-digging-over-his-classified-info-leak-n2428067
The Nazi party also had jet bombers, very expensive and could only carry maybe one 500kg bomb. The entire jet aircraft fleet of WWII Germany was based on advanced technology and low grade material. The ME-262 had blades and vanes that would crack after cooling due to the substandard materials used. The cracking would lead to the next pilot suffering catastrophic engine failure.
One may create the perfect weapon, but, it must be considered a failure if it costs more to make than the cost of the damage done to the enemy. This is the lesson that must be learned.
The new jet turbines ran on kerosene equivalent, not the much more highly refined high-octane avgas. They would have greatly eased fuel production constraints. Kero is vastly easier to make.
If that meth-lunatic painter had not diverted jet engines to “vengeance bombers”, the resultant easily fueled jet fighter squadrons might have ended daylight bombing. Quickly.
Oops.