Reflections on the Problems Faced by Ships and the Use of Energy Weapons

In our previous articles, we talked about the conflicts that took place in the Black Sea during the Russia-Ukraine war and how the Russian Navy ships faced many threats ranging from classical sea mines to innovative simple technologies and complex technological weapons. In these conflicts, we, like the rest of the world, watched in amazement as Russia, a great naval power, was rendered almost immobilized in the Black Sea by Ukraine, a country with a rather modest naval force.

This seems to have created a trauma in Russia similar to the trauma caused by the destruction of tanks in such large numbers that it almost exhausted the tank stocks. The measures taken by the Russian navy suggest this. However, concerns about the defense of the ships were not limited to Russia. These concerns have started to be shared by other countries as well. The fact that a large number of Russian ships, including the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet, were easily hit has led to the questioning of their former strong position. 

The massive destruction of tanks and armored vehicles is due to the emergence of new technologies such as new generation anti-tank weapons and UCAVs, along with old weapons and ammunition such as mines, IEDs, conventional anti-tank weapons, armed helicopters and aircraft. Since tanks and armored vehicles are very large weapons/vehicles, they can be seen from very long distances, making them easy targets and unable to evade attacks. 

The same problem applies to ships. Since ships are much larger than tanks, they are much easier to detect and shoot down than even tanks and armored vehicles. Moreover, ships are also tracked by radars and have other disadvantages compared to tanks and armored vehicles. These disadvantages stem from the fact that, with the exception of submarines, ships have virtually no concealment while on the open sea. 

At sea, unlike on land, there are no natural terrain features such as mountains and valleys behind which ships far from shore can hide, or man-made facilities such as bridges and buildings under which they can hide.  The defense weapons and systems on the ships are also unable to provide adequate defense against the aforementioned multifaceted attacks. 

For this reason, Ukraine has managed to attack Russian ships in the Black Sea on several occasions using a variety of weapons ranging from mines to UCAVs and coastal defense missile batteries. It has also hit and sunk several Russian vessels using unmanned naval vessels and even small civilian boats and jet skis fitted with remote control systems and loaded with explosives. This has raised the question of how to protect ships around the world.

The problem is not only related to naval vessels. In the world today, a significant part of intercontinental cargo and even human transportation is carried out by sea. Most importantly, the tools, equipment, weapons and ammunition that countries at war purchase from other countries or send as aid are also transported by sea vessels. For this reason, the protection of civilian vessels is as important as the protection of naval vessels. The safety of civilian maritime transportation is likely to be one of the most important global security issues in the future.

For years, civilian vessels have been intercepted, seized and attacked in various ways by pirates of African and Southeast Asian origin armed with simple weapons. These attacks have taken on a new dimension with the actions of the Houthis based in Yemen, following the exterminationist attacks launched by Israel against the Palestinians living in Gaza. 

Since November, the Houthis have been targeting commercial ships passing through the Gulf of Aden, the Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Red Sea, and vice versa. Although these attacks are in retaliation for Israel's actions in Gaza, not only Israeli ships but also ships of states with close relations with Israel have been subjected to attacks. 

On the other hand, the attacks also cause new problems for countries like Iran, which has long had problems with the West and Israel. This is because Iran is accused of being the real power behind the attacks by the countries whose ships were attacked or suffered economic damage from the attacks. These countries claim that the Houthis procure the weapons and equipment used in the attacks from Iran. According to them, Iran is thus putting pressure on Israel and the West without participating in any direct conflict.

The Houthis allegedly possess Iranian-supplied short-range ballistic missiles, land-based cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles and unmanned naval vessels that can be used against naval vessels. Using these weapons, the Houthis have succeeded in causing billions of dollars of damage to maritime trade in the region by attacking ships using waters near the part of Yemen under their control.

This damage must have reached such serious proportions that a naval task force organized by many countries was sent to the region. This task force is supported by the United States, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, France, Greece, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sri Lanka and the United Kingdom (UK). This force has been bombing Houthi missile launchers, air defense systems, radars and ammunition depots for some time. However, both the Houthis' statements and public information about the operation suggest that this has not worked very well. 

On the other hand, even if the bombardments are effective, it does not seem to be a sustainable course of action for such a task force to stay in the region for a long time and put the Houthis under pressure by bombing them continuously. This is because most of the countries participating in this operation are not only interested in the problems in this region. For example, in the Russia-Ukraine war, they also directly or indirectly support Ukraine, providing arms, ammunition and financial resources. 

Moreover, since these countries downsized their armies and reduced their arms industry capacities after the end of the Cold War, they face problems in replenishing the shortage of weapons, vehicles and ammunition they need in a short period of time. Moreover, they are unlikely to be able to participate in the mission to Yemen for a long time, as they have made decisions such as expanding their national armies and increasing their stockpiles of vehicles and weapons with the assessment that the Russian threat has increased after the war in Ukraine.

However, these countries also have some advantages to support this force with a small number of ships. First of all, since most of these countries are the most industrialized countries in the world, they can rapidly increase their arms industry capacity.  On the other hand, they have the capacity to produce drones and unmanned sea, land and air vehicles for civilian purposes that can also be used for military operations. They have also reached a certain level in concentrated energy weapons, which have been under development for a long time. 

Energy weapons are attracting a great deal of attention as they are seen as a weapon that can provide naval forces with a great capability and at the same time as an economical weapon. The advantages of these weapons in terms of resupply, maintenance, longevity and virtually unlimited firing capacity have led to more resources being devoted to their development. These weapons do not need a magazine and therefore do not need bullets. They don't use any explosives, so they don't have the problem of empty casings. Since they do not burn any gunpowder or explosives, there are no toxic gas residues. So they are very environmentally friendly.

Since there are no magazines and ammunition, they do not need large warehouses and personnel to be assigned to these warehouses. So they do not increase the load of the ships. Since they have no bullets, there is no restriction on their firing. Theoretically, they can fire thousands of times. Their cost per firing is therefore very low. For example, while a simple missile can cost thousands or even hundreds of thousands of dollars, high-energy weapons can do the job of a missile at a cost ranging from 1 to 15 dollars. 

For this reason, many countries have recently devoted huge resources to developing such weapons. The US, France and the UK are at the forefront of this. They are followed by China, India, Iran, Japan, Russia, South Korea and Turkey. However, despite all these efforts, field trials show that these systems have not yet reached the level of being sufficiently effective.  

The Americans have installed and are using these weapons on some destroyers and cruisers. According to some statements made by the US military, these weapons are not effective enough against all types of threats because the energy density they can send is not yet high enough.  For this reason, they are planned to be used as part of the layered defense concept.

In this form, energy weapons are used against targets that they can neutralize. For example, they will only be used to shoot down UAVs and UCAVs, since they cannot neutralize weapon systems such as missiles. This would make it possible to allocate more kinetic munitions for other threats. 

However, energy weapons are not only ineffective against some weapons due to their low energy density, but are also affected by weather conditions. For example, the range and effectiveness of laser light is reduced in foggy and stormy weather. These weapons need to be developed over time to be effective against long-range targets and in poor atmospheric conditions. 

Another problem is that these weapons (e.g. high-powered radio frequency and microwave energy weapons) can affect friendly as well as enemy vehicles and weapons. When used against an enemy target, these weapons can potentially cause collateral damage to friendly forces behind the target. 

On the other hand, there are also challenges related to the energy to be used by these weapons. Ships need to generate the energy needed to fire and cool these weapons, in addition to the current requirement. Batteries are also needed to store some of this energy, ready for continuous use. Another problem is the need for more fuel oil to produce the energy needed.  

In conclusion, despite years of development and billions of dollars of R&D spending, directed energy weapons have not yet reached the level where they can be used effectively on warships. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that energy weapons will be a major addition to the capabilities of navies in the future. Once these problems are solved, energy weapons have the potential to be the most effective weapon for both offense and defense against multidimensional attacks on ships.  

For this reason, it is important for Turkey, which is one of the countries working to develop energy weapons, to continue its R&D efforts without interruption and to produce its own energy weapons. This is not enough. In parallel with the development of these weapons, efforts should also be made to develop weapons, vehicles, equipment and materials for defense against these weapons. Moreover, these weapons should not only be used on ships. Once the range and other problems are solved, these weapons can be used against satellites, aircraft, tanks, armored vehicles and even single soldiers. 

Note: Information on energy weapons was obtained from Shephard Magazine.