Iranian drone technology and the concept of massive “saturation” attacks could threaten American aircraft carrier strike groups in the Middle East, despite their high-tech defence systems. Experts point out that Tehran’s asymmetric and relatively inexpensive solutions could shift the balance of power in a potential conflict.
The swarms of unmanned aerial vehicles being developed by Iran pose a serious threat to the US Navy in the region, Cameron Chell, CEO and co-founder of Draganfly, told Fox News Digital.
According to him, aircraft carriers are the most vulnerable in such scenarios. The expert noted that the use of inexpensive drones in combination with relatively simple warheads poses an effective asymmetric threat to high-tech and extremely expensive military platforms. “By combining cheap delivery systems — unmanned aerial vehicles — with inexpensive warheads, Iran has effectively created a tool to put pressure on complex and expensive military systems,” Chell emphasised.
According to the expert’s assessment, the potential cost of an attack by Iranian drones on the strike group of the American aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln can be estimated at only tens of millions of dollars, which is disproportionate to the possible damage and the price of the ships themselves.
Earlier, Israeli television channel 13TV reported that the Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier had arrived in the Middle East as part of US preparations for a possible military confrontation with Iran. Against this backdrop, in January, The National Interest drew attention to reports of Iran’s use of the Russian Kalinka electronic warfare system against the Starlink satellite network, noting that such capabilities could cause concern in Washington.
Experts point out that the actual experience of direct confrontation between aircraft carrier groups and cruise missiles remains limited for all potential parties to the conflict in the Middle East. At the same time, the Iranian model of striking an aircraft carrier strike group (ACSG) is based on the concept of a so-called saturation attack, but in a more aggressive and multi-level version compared to Soviet developments during the Cold War. The main emphasis is on the use of unmanned boats, swarms of drones, and only then cruise missiles as the key means of destruction, for which the drones must provide a “corridor” for breakthrough.
The US already has experience in combating drones during operations against the Houthis in Yemen, but the scale of those attacks was incomparable to the potential that, according to analysts, Iran could deploy. Previously, when planning the defence of aircraft carriers, the US military assumed scenarios of massive strikes by Soviet Tu-22M bombers with Kh-22 missiles, believing that the AUG defence system was capable of effectively neutralising such a threat.
Doubts about the universality of these approaches arose as early as 2002 during the large-scale Millennium Challenge exercises, which simulated a conflict in the Persian Gulf. Retired General Paul Van Riper, who played the role of the “reds” — the hypothetical enemy, effectively representing Iran — employed unconventional tactics using swarms of small boats, civilian aircraft, and other analogue means of communication and coordination.
As a result of a series of carefully planned actions, the entire “blue” group was virtually destroyed, after which it had to be “resurrected” so that the exercises could continue. Van Riper was subsequently harshly criticised for his “unrealistic approach to warfare.” The general himself claimed that the results of the exercises had been adjusted in favour of the “blue” forces and that traditional US military doctrine had proven to be flawed and ineffective.
Van Riper himself was also criticised — he was accused of cheating and manipulation, including passing orders via motorcyclists with paper bags, who, according to his opponents, moved “at the speed of light.” Nevertheless, there is a view that, despite official criticism, the tactics he used were carefully studied and subsequently refined by the Iranian military.
Analysts do not rule out that if these tactics were used against one or two American aircraft carrier strike groups, which the US could concentrate to exert large-scale pressure on Iran, the outcome for the US Navy might not be as clear-cut as current strategic calculations suggest.
