News

• Ukrainian drones forced American soldiers to rethink movement, concealment, and battlefield survival
• Blackhawk troops changed their tactics after persistent aerial surveillance exposed their movements
• American armored vehicles suffered losses despite attempts to conceal them from drones

A 10-day US Army combat training exercise in Germany has drawn attention after reports claimed Ukrainian drones overwhelmed an American mechanized company during the drill.

At the center of it is Blackhawk Company, part of the 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment, which spent the ten days training at a range in Hohenfels.

The company commander, Capt. Allan Watson, disputes that account, insisting the report failed to capture what his soldiers actually accomplished over those days.

Blackhawk Company entered a 14-by-27-kilometer range where Ukrainian personnel from the 412th Regiment supported opposing forces during initial operations.

The Ukrainian elite formation, called Nemesis, had battlefield experience and used aerial systems to observe American movements across the range.

The American unit claims to lack the counter-drone equipment its soldiers would have preferred throughout the event.

Rather than relying on unavailable equipment, soldiers altered how they occupied positions, moved vehicles, and concealed personnel from aerial observation.

Bradley vehicles moved beneath dense vegetation, while troops used steep ground and difficult routes to reduce their exposure from above.

The company also studied its movements from an aerial perspective, changing routines that might have made detection easier for enemy operators.

Despite those changes, American vehicles were destroyed during simulated combat, including Bradley vehicles plus tanks, while some crews were also counted as losses.

Watson, however, rejected the idea that these losses proved heavy armor had become unsuitable for modern combat environments.

He said armored vehicles remained useful because they provided mobility and protection while allowing soldiers to move through difficult terrain during operations.

The commander said drones could locate American forces, but exploiting that information still required personnel operating at ground level.

That distinction became important as the exercise progressed, because Ukrainian aerial surveillance did not remove the need for conventional reconnaissance.

On the sixth day, Blackhawk Company shifted from defensive tasks toward offensive operations, while the Ukrainian formation later operated alongside American troops.

Watson said the soldiers became increasingly confident as they adjusted to conditions that challenged assumptions formed through earlier training.

The Ukrainian participants also shared methods for operating inexpensive drones over long distances and linking battlefield observation with rapid engagement.

“They put on a masterclass in sensor-to-shooter kill chain management and speed,” said Capt. Allan Watson, Blackhawk Company commander.

Watson also said the experience showed that technology alone does not determine battlefield outcomes, because human decisions remain essential during combat.

For Watson, the principal lesson was not that drones had replaced armored formations, but that units must adjust tactics when aerial surveillance becomes persistent.

However, this is also not the first US military exercise where Ukrainian drone teams have caught American forces off guard.

In an earlier exercise in Germany, US troops were defeated so quickly that exercise officials allowed those units to re-enter the scenario.

These events were designed to expose weaknesses, test countermeasures, and help American forces prepare for drone-heavy warfare.

Ukraine’s experience against Russia has made its drone units especially capable in unmanned systems and electronic warfare operations.

The repeated setbacks, therefore, raise a more direct question about whether US forces should adapt more quickly and improve their capabilities.

Rather than explaining away each defeat as a training outcome, American forces need to treat these exercises as warnings.

Via Task&Purpose

• First new 'PEN' digital rangefinder with the OM System name unveiled
• It costs from $999.99 / £849 (Australia pricing TBC)
• New 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 Mark III kit lens launched alongside the camera

Olympus fans, the day has finally come — OM System has relaunched the Olympus PEN series, and put its name on it, with the new OM System PEN.

The new PEN carries the torch of the iconic Olympus PEN-F, with a classic and compact retro form factor and a low-cost plastic body to keep costs down (rather than aluminum). I must say it looks every part the travel and everyday mirrorless camera, with an equally and surprisingly attractive entry-level price point more in line with the PEN E-P7's.

Whereas the (slightly pricier) five star-rated EM-5 Mark II has a viewfinder bump (which also looks great in my opinion), the OM System PEN is a rangefinder-style mirrorless camera, with the same 2.36m-dot OLED viewfinder that sits flush in the body instead.

And the specs are just as attractive as the IPX1-rated dust- and splash-proof body: the same 20.4MP micro four thirds sensor with 5-axis image stabilization rated up to 5.5EV, 121-point phase detection autofocus with subject detection AF for people and animals, plus a host of computational photography modes that are an absolute blast to play with — my OM-3 review paints a picture of how fun modes such as Live ND can be.

OM System has also added various color profiles, including two 'Cinema' picture modes designed for 4K video recording, and once again included a color/monochrome switch on the camera's front which packs numerous film-inspired looks.

The camera uses OM System's BLS-7 battery, which delivers a generous 410 shots on a full charge, while USB-C charging further enhances its travel-friendly credentials.

When you consider the retro IPX1-rated body, built-in viewfinder, and stabilized sensor, the PEN feels like exceptionally good value, even if it features a dated micro four thirds sensor which is smaller than APS-C and full-frame, and adds very little that is actually new.

For me, however, the format has always delivered a compelling mix of quality, power and features, and is an easy recommendation for people stepping up from a smartphone, who will find the computational modes addictively fun and familiar.

It was the PEN series that we have been waiting for OM System to refresh since it acquired the Olympus name, and now that day has come the new compact mirrorless model does not disappoint.

Pricing-wise, the new PEN becomes OM System's entry-level model — $999.99 / £849 bags you the camera body, in silver or black, or for an extra $100 / £100 the kit with the new mark III version of the 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, which was launched alongside the camera, with both due to go on sale from October 1. I'll update this page with Australia pricing when I get it.

I can't wait to get my hands-on the camera — if it's anything like the previous OM System cameras I've reviewed, it'll be a lot of fun to test. For me, the OM System PEN looks like a serious best beginner mirrorless camera of the year contender.