7 ms·

> they just shook up the world's militaries For the good ones, I doubt it. Israel today has trophy [0] which can detect if an rpg is going to hit its tank and

by mrep 1y ago

> they just shook up the world's militaries For the good ones, I doubt it. Israel today has trophy [0] which can detect if an rpg is going to hit its tank and shoot it out of the sky. (from wiki): The system allegedly relies heavily on high-speed computational technologies. Upon detection of an incoming projectile, the system automatically computes various parameters, such as the approach vector, nature of the threat, time to impact, and angle of approach. The defensive projectiles are launched by two rotating projectile launchers positioned on the sides of the vehicle. These launchers deploy a number of small EFPs (Explosively Formed Penetrators), forming a precise and closely spaced matrix, targeting an area in front of the anti-tank projectile. And that's one country with 10 million people and a mere $46.5 billion in military spending. And BTW allies generally share tech (we the US suck right now (sorry)) but Trophy is being integrated with multiple allies [1]. Developing automated drone shooting destroyers I think we can do. EDIT: To add, I bet those drones can be shot down by 1 minigun or shotgun shell which aren't relatively expensive. Edit 2, the dutch already have a badass automated minigun too [2, 3]. Edit 3: multiple countries have similar systems but they are all mainly for boats. I think we can adapt the to army bases [4]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_(countermeasure) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_(countermeasure) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_(countermeasure)#International_operators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_(countermeasure)#Intern... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goalkeeper_CIWS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goalkeeper_CIWS [3]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AaUNipuygE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AaUNipuygE [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-in_weapon_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-in_weapon_system

serjester 1y ago
There’s been plenty of anti missile systems deployed to Ukraine and the tank losses have still been absolutely insane. Fundamentally it’s not about building anti-missile technology, it’s about doing it cheaply and at scale. That is a much, much tougher problem. These drones cost less than a thousand bucks, and if each interception cost you 100k (the cost of a trophy shot) you’re going to lose a lot of equipment. It only takes one miss. Now imagine scaling that system to protect an entire airfield. That seems next to impossible when these drones have a range of 10+ miles and are basically unjammable. You need China level surveillance across your entire county as a bare minimum.
- mrep 1y ago
  Check out my edit 2. The Dutch already have an automated minigun. Bullets aren't that expensive relative to those shitty consumer drones which would get torn apart by them. Also, ukraine doesn't have Trophy or any minigun/shotun defense system that I know of yet. Having automated miniguns/shotguns near civilian areas definitely creates a challenge but I think our defense budget can handle that.
  - jiggawatts 1y ago
    The Goalkeeper CIWS costs something like $3000 per second that it is firing. It's not a cheap system! It could be scaled down to the size of a normal minigun, but even that is about $50 per second. Meanwhile drone costs keep falling, Ukraine is well below $500 per drone now.
    - mrep 1y ago
      $500 for a drone including its bomb that can incapacitate a military aircraft and can survive multiple bullets? Also, I don't think you need 30 mm bullets to take out a drone. Those bullets are for much more hardened targets.
      - jiggawatts 1y ago
        All of these weapons fire a 1-2 second burst to make sure they hit the target. Don’t forget that the drones are moving, there’s wind, etc… Modern CIWS will use radar to track their own outbound bullets and adjust their aim in real time to hit the target.
  - a_vanderbilt 1y ago
    An increasing number of drones being used aren't the shitty consumer ones either. They are still relatively cheap, but their guidance systems and payloads are improving dramatically compared to the start of the war. Saturation attacks are still possible on automated kinetic kill systems, and for a price that is sustainable for the attacker.
tim333 1y ago
Trophy systems are like $2m and drones are cheap.
- mrep 1y ago
  Trophy is designed for fast moving anti tank missiles. These cheap drones can be shot down with a shotgun. I think we can make anti drone systems a little cheaper.
LorenPechtel 1y ago
That's built to kill an inbound missile. And it's almost certainly possible to bleed it for less than it's own cost. What we need is cheap systems that can be deployed in large numbers that fire wimpy short ranged stuff so it doesn't do too much damage when it falls back. Shotguns are good at this, the smaller pellets do not fall back with lethal energy.

by mrep 1y ago

serjester 1y ago

There’s been plenty of anti missile systems deployed to Ukraine and the tank losses have still been absolutely insane. Fundamentally it’s not about building anti-missile technology, it’s about doing it cheaply and at scale. That is a much, much tougher problem. These drones cost less than a thousand bucks, and if each interception cost you 100k (the cost of a trophy shot) you’re going to lose a lot of equipment. It only takes one miss. Now imagine scaling that system to protect an entire airfield. That seems next to impossible when these drones have a range of 10+ miles and are basically unjammable. You need China level surveillance across your entire county as a bare minimum.

mrep 1y ago
Check out my edit 2. The Dutch already have an automated minigun. Bullets aren't that expensive relative to those shitty consumer drones which would get torn apart by them. Also, ukraine doesn't have Trophy or any minigun/shotun defense system that I know of yet. Having automated miniguns/shotguns near civilian areas definitely creates a challenge but I think our defense budget can handle that.
- jiggawatts 1y ago
  The Goalkeeper CIWS costs something like $3000 per second that it is firing. It's not a cheap system! It could be scaled down to the size of a normal minigun, but even that is about $50 per second. Meanwhile drone costs keep falling, Ukraine is well below $500 per drone now.
  - mrep 1y ago
    $500 for a drone including its bomb that can incapacitate a military aircraft and can survive multiple bullets? Also, I don't think you need 30 mm bullets to take out a drone. Those bullets are for much more hardened targets.
    - jiggawatts 1y ago
      All of these weapons fire a 1-2 second burst to make sure they hit the target. Don’t forget that the drones are moving, there’s wind, etc… Modern CIWS will use radar to track their own outbound bullets and adjust their aim in real time to hit the target.
- a_vanderbilt 1y ago
  An increasing number of drones being used aren't the shitty consumer ones either. They are still relatively cheap, but their guidance systems and payloads are improving dramatically compared to the start of the war. Saturation attacks are still possible on automated kinetic kill systems, and for a price that is sustainable for the attacker.

tim333 1y ago

Trophy systems are like $2m and drones are cheap.

mrep 1y ago
Trophy is designed for fast moving anti tank missiles. These cheap drones can be shot down with a shotgun. I think we can make anti drone systems a little cheaper.

LorenPechtel 1y ago

That's built to kill an inbound missile. And it's almost certainly possible to bleed it for less than it's own cost. What we need is cheap systems that can be deployed in large numbers that fire wimpy short ranged stuff so it doesn't do too much damage when it falls back. Shotguns are good at this, the smaller pellets do not fall back with lethal energy.