No system is proof. Just because you have defenses doesn't mean your nation can't retaliate.
Honestly, in our situation, I think defensive systems for civilian and defence infrastructure in the UK would be a complete waste of money and we should go all in on survivable retaliatory systems. The cost balance is currently overwhelmingly in favour of the attacker and is likely to remain so for a very long time. The only caveat to that is that you need someone to retaliate against for deterrence to work.
I agree, but I also predict that in the next decade defensive drones and SAM systems are about to get together, such that something like S-500 or Iron Dome will be controlling hundreds or thousands of defensive drones in the air at one time.
I'm sure you're right, but you'll still find the cost balance strongly in favour of the attacker, because, given the precision of the drones and the inherent high value and critical nature of unprotected targets, the defender will have to stop all the drones whereas the attacker will only have to get one through. Directed energy weapons may help somewhat, but they have obvious inherent problems, particularly when used against low flying targets in urban environments.
I'm picturing a defensive drone that has an onboard 20mm (or whatever) cannon that the SAM system guides to intercept and it shoot the drone down. The drone then returns to patrol to engage other targets. That way, the cost to the defense is tolerably low. More expensive missiles and lasers engage the leakers, and more and more targets are armored so that the smaller drones cannot destroy them.
On the SAM systems themselves, I keep expecting to read that the radars will be broken up into smaller and smaller components, (so, instead of one big air search radar, 30 small ones coordinating to do the same thing). Hasn't happened yet. Must be tough to do.
Edited by glenn239, 20 September 2019 - 0950 AM.