Ukraine and Russia are rapidly fielding unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) for direct combat roles in the Donbas region, marking a new phase in battlefield automation. Both nations are leveraging robotic platforms for breaching operations, fire support, and logistics under fire — a shift driven by high attrition rates among infantry and the proliferation of FPV drone threats.
Ukrainian Forces Deploy Ironclad and Ratel UGVs to the Front
Ukraine has begun operational deployment of several domestically developed UGV systems designed for direct engagement and support roles. Among the most prominent is the “Ironclad” tracked UGV developed by Roboneers. This platform features modular weapon mounts capable of integrating machine guns (7.62 mm or 12.7 mm), grenade launchers, or ATGMs. It also includes EO/IR sensors for day/night targeting and remote operation via encrypted radio links.
The Ironclad has reportedly been used in urban combat scenarios to suppress enemy firing points while minimizing risk to Ukrainian infantry. Its low profile and armored chassis offer limited protection against small arms fire but remain vulnerable to FPV drones and anti-tank weapons.
In addition to Ironclad, Ukraine has fielded lighter wheeled UGVs such as the “Ratel S” — a platform designed primarily for logistics resupply under fire but now being adapted for remote-controlled bomb delivery missions. These systems are often used in conjunction with UAV reconnaissance feeds to coordinate movements across contested terrain.
Russia Fields Shturm-M Breaching Robots with Fire Support Capabilities
In response to Ukrainian advances and increasing use of drones and robotics, Russian forces have deployed their own generations of combat-capable UGVs — notably the Shturm-M system based on BMP-3 chassis architecture. Unlike earlier Russian experiments with Uran-9 (which suffered from poor autonomy and comms issues), Shturm-M appears purpose-built for high-risk breaching operations in urban or trench-dense environments.
The Shturm-M is equipped with a stabilized turret carrying either a 30 mm autocannon or heavy machine gun, along with smoke dispensers and reactive armor panels. Some variants have been observed carrying mine-clearing line charges or flamethrower modules akin to those seen on TOS-1A systems.
According to Russian MoD-affiliated sources such as Zvezda TV and RIA Novosti (October 2025), these robotic assault teams are being used alongside manned BMP-3s during combined arms pushes into fortified Ukrainian positions near Avdiivka and Marinka.
Tactical Drivers Behind Robotic Ground Systems
The increasing reliance on UGVs by both Ukrainian and Russian forces stems from several converging battlefield trends:
- Infantry Attrition: High casualty rates have created pressure on both sides to reduce frontline exposure.
- FPV Drone Proliferation: The ubiquity of first-person-view kamikaze drones makes traditional vehicle movement hazardous without remote options.
- C4ISR Integration: Improved battlefield networking allows remote control of UGVs via UAV relay links or hardened tactical datalinks like Ukraine’s Kropyva system.
- Chemical/NBC Threat Mitigation: Robotic units can operate in contaminated zones without risk to personnel — especially relevant given concerns over potential use of thermobaric or phosphorus munitions near enclosed trenches.
This shift represents not merely an experimental phase but an emerging doctrine where unmanned platforms fill high-risk niches previously occupied by mechanized infantry or sappers.
Limitations: Comms Jamming, Autonomy Gaps, Vulnerability
Despite their growing presence on the battlefield, current-generation UGVs face significant limitations that constrain their effectiveness:
- Line-of-Sight Control: Most systems rely on short-range encrypted RF links vulnerable to terrain masking or EW jamming.
- Lack of Full Autonomy: While some AI-assisted navigation exists (e.g., obstacle avoidance), few systems can operate independently beyond pre-programmed paths or basic waypoint following.
- SIGINT Exposure: Active control signals can be triangulated by enemy EW units for counter-battery-like strikes using loitering munitions or FPVs.
- Lethality vs Armor Tradeoff: To remain mobile and affordable, most UGVs lack sufficient armor against even light AT weapons — making them expendable rather than survivable assets.
This means current deployments often treat these platforms as semi-disposable tools — useful for specific missions but not yet reliable replacements for manned AFVs or infantry teams under all conditions.
Evolving Concepts: Swarming Tactics & AI Targeting
The next phase in robotic warfare appears focused on swarming tactics and greater autonomy. Ukrainian developers have begun experimenting with coordinated attacks involving multiple small tracked robots acting under semi-autonomous control from a single operator node. These swarm tactics aim to overwhelm enemy positions through saturation rather than precision firepower alone.
A similar trend is visible on the Russian side with increased integration between UAV reconnaissance assets (e.g., Orlan-10) feeding targeting data into centralized C2 nodes that then dispatch robotic breachers toward weak points identified via SIGINT/IMINT fusion.
If successful at scale, these doctrines could reshape how trench warfare is conducted — replacing massed human waves with synchronized waves of expendable machines operating under partial AI guidance supported by ISR overlays from above.
