drones are probably the boss level of asymmetrical warfare ever seen
cheap to make - if you care to do so -- to stop them your enemy has to deploy expensive anti-missile tech -- thereby in a war of attrition the person who quickly churns out drones wins.
drones can also destroy -- more expensive sites like oil plants, factories etc that cost XXX more than the drones
and the person who flies the drone if not automated -- can be safe somewhere
That was years ago. Today's armies have plenty of cheap anti-air weapons deployed everywhere, and they manage to intercept the vast majority of long-distance drones cost-effectively.
The Gulf War era world, where a small professional force using expensive high-tech gadgets could win a war without the enemy being able to fight back, is gone. Today you still need the small high-tech force to win, but you also need a larger cost-effective force for defense.
>Today's armies ... manage to intercept the vast majority of long-distance drones cost-effectively.
Army singular. There is one army on the planed doing that right now and trump hates its leader thus didnt even ask for help with eventual drone defense.
Didn't we just see something like 15% of Russia's nuclear bombers wiped out from a drone attack last year?
A guy got close enough to shoot at and almost kill a Presidential candidate during the last election -- imagine how different things would have been if he had just used something like this[0] instead.
The first time someone attacks an outdoor music festival with drone strikes like that asshole who shot up that concert in Vegas is going to change society for the worse. :-/
That particular attack against Russian bombers was done by undercover saboteurs working deep inside enemy territory. The drones being discussed here are essentially cheap cruise missiles. For example, you have a ~200 kg drone carrying a ~50 kg warhead that is launched using a rocket booster and capable of flying 1000+ km. In Ukraine and Russia, 80-90% of such drones are routinely intercepted by cost-effective air defenses.
https://archive.fo/ry4FE
That website barely works anymore
Try firefox
If you are using a custom DNS in Firefox, add the site as an Exception to bypass the custom DNS.
drones are probably the boss level of asymmetrical warfare ever seen
cheap to make - if you care to do so -- to stop them your enemy has to deploy expensive anti-missile tech -- thereby in a war of attrition the person who quickly churns out drones wins.
drones can also destroy -- more expensive sites like oil plants, factories etc that cost XXX more than the drones
and the person who flies the drone if not automated -- can be safe somewhere
That was years ago. Today's armies have plenty of cheap anti-air weapons deployed everywhere, and they manage to intercept the vast majority of long-distance drones cost-effectively.
The Gulf War era world, where a small professional force using expensive high-tech gadgets could win a war without the enemy being able to fight back, is gone. Today you still need the small high-tech force to win, but you also need a larger cost-effective force for defense.
>Today's armies ... manage to intercept the vast majority of long-distance drones cost-effectively.
Army singular. There is one army on the planed doing that right now and trump hates its leader thus didnt even ask for help with eventual drone defense.
Didn't we just see something like 15% of Russia's nuclear bombers wiped out from a drone attack last year?
A guy got close enough to shoot at and almost kill a Presidential candidate during the last election -- imagine how different things would have been if he had just used something like this[0] instead.
The first time someone attacks an outdoor music festival with drone strikes like that asshole who shot up that concert in Vegas is going to change society for the worse. :-/
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrZ1aH5gtMU&pp=ygUVd29ybGQnc...
There are drones, and then there are drones.
That particular attack against Russian bombers was done by undercover saboteurs working deep inside enemy territory. The drones being discussed here are essentially cheap cruise missiles. For example, you have a ~200 kg drone carrying a ~50 kg warhead that is launched using a rocket booster and capable of flying 1000+ km. In Ukraine and Russia, 80-90% of such drones are routinely intercepted by cost-effective air defenses.
>80-90%
I mean, at that price, I'm sending a wave every week and see what hits.
Try a new wave of drones every night. Drone strikes slowly degrade enemy infrastructure over time, which may prove decisive after a few years.
What's interesting to me are the countermeasures against such a drone.
The US military has used microphone arrays and radar as well to determine the trajectories of local threats, from snipers to field artillery.
Probably next would be "lasers" to disable any threats.
Styropyro and Tech Ingredients both have had youtube videos on high powered lasers.
Ukraine also uses microphones:
>Ukraine Using Thousands Of Networked Microphones To Track Russian Drones
https://www.twz.com/land/thousands-of-networked-microphones-... (2024)
Yes, around 20% of Russia’s long range aviation wiped out by drones.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb
"In Saudi capital", in case you were wondering.