Destruction rating: problems and solutions
I have to inform you about a high-profile conflict situation in the circles of UAV commanders. In December 2024, one of the brigades submitted a report claiming the highest number of targets destroyed in its area of responsibility.
Since the Ministry of Digital Transformation introduced a unified destruction rating, everyone in the Defence Forces saw the declared result, which surpassed those of our best units – the Magyar Birds Brigade of the Armed Forces, the Lazar detachment of the National Guard of Ukraine, and the SSU's Alpha Centre.
Given that there were other units operating in the area of this brigade that had a clear understanding of the situation, many raised concerns about the verification of the results. This was not just a matter of personal ambition but also impacted the distribution of additional drones.
I conducted an investigation into this sensitive issue.
The results are as follows:
1. The brigade indeed demonstrated outstanding effectiveness and inflicted significant losses on enemy personnel and equipment. However, destruction target verification within the brigade was not conducted in the same manner as in other units operating in the area. This led to several errors. There are some established cases when the elimination of a single occupier was recorded multiple times in the database, the reported destruction of two assault groups for four occupiers each did not actually occur, as seen in the video, yet the database recorded them as eliminated, an armored vehicle was marked as destroyed, although in reality, it sustained no hits or damage.
2. By coincidence, control was also weakened in Kyiv in December, as the OP took control of the distribution of drones from Minister Fedorov and it was not clear to whom the verification team was subordinate. As a result, the reporting discrepancies in this brigade went unnoticed.
3. Following a reassessment, 300 points were deducted from the brigade’s strike effectiveness rating, and it took a slightly different place.
4. The verification management system has been restored, and the verification team has improved and reinforced control procedures. From now on, strike reports from units will be open for cross-checking by adjacent formations.
Conclusions:
1. Modern warfare is about verified targets and objectives, which serve as the basis for planning the allocation of funds and personnel. That is why I once proposed the idea of creating a strike effectiveness rating, and I respect the leadership of the Ministry of Digital Transformation for implementing it at a high organizational level—this is entirely to their significant merit. Accurate reporting on enemy and own losses is essential for a proper assessment of the situation and for evaluating the effectiveness of both friendly and enemy units. The use of video for After-Action Review is fundamental to improvement and training. Therefore, verified results are not about extorting additional drones from a ministry but, first and foremost, about providing unit commanders with the data they need to refine their operations. I urge you to pay attention to this matter to prevent future scandals, which could become public and potentially damage the careers of some commanders.
2. Having the results of the work of adjacent units open to units has its drawbacks - competition for targets. Therefore, there is an urgent need to divide the rating into two categories: the rating of tactical drone units operating in the area of their troops, and the rating of operational units operating in the area of many units.
3. The system of verification of objective control data has shown its high efficiency and ability to quickly find errors and correct them quickly. Therefore, it is vital to create a system for verifying the main results and indicators of combat operations in the defence forces.
4. I ask all commanders to carefully check the reports that will be submitted in January before they are reviewed by your colleagues and the verification team. I will inform you of the results.
