22 ms·

Many of the issues sound like issues coming from using improvised civilian hobbyist tech and doctrine being in its infancy. If current FPV drones are bit lackl

Many of the issues sound like issues coming from using improvised civilian hobbyist tech and doctrine being in its infancy. If current FPV drones are bit lackluster, it doesn't preclude 'next generation' that are purposefully developed for military use won't be useful. Also it sounds like the designation of "FPV drone" is specific to particular family of drones specific in current day and time, which may be something quite else next year. Like, obviously the next stage is a FPV drone with some capabilities of "reusable" drone or loitering munition author complains of (capability to hover easily)? Or "reusable" drone with FPV camera?

palata 1y ago
> Many of the issues sound like issues coming from using improvised civilian hobbyist tech I don't think it's improvised civilian hobbyist tech. They run autopilots that also fly professional drones and can fly planes. I think it's mostly that it has to be super cheap, otherwise it doesn't bring value (because other weapons are more efficient if you have more money). If your one-way drone costs 10k dollars, maybe it's too expensive even though it can fly during the night. And then there are fundamental limitations, like flying in bad weather. > obviously the next stage is a FPV drone with some capabilities of "reusable" drone But a reusable drone won't go inside a hangar (because at this point it probably won't come out). If your drone can go somewhere, drop something and come back, doesn't it mean that another class of weapons could do this job?
- spwa4 1y ago
  Sadly I think that AI will make a very large difference here. And AI hardware that can control weapons is already hundreds of dollars and dropping fast, because a cell phone can do it.
  - Nicook 1y ago
    [flagged]
- bluGill 1y ago
  $10,000 can be cheap for a one way drone. Bombs often cost for more than that. The real question is value, if hitting the target is worth more than the cost of what you hit it with then you have a good value. Taking out a $1000 drone with a $100,000 missile is a good value if that drone is headed for a $1,000,000 building, but if the drone is headed for a cow probably not worth it.
  - palata 1y ago
    Sure. But isn't that the point of the article? That the author is not sure if they bring as much value as advertised?
- LorenPechtel 1y ago
  And the reusable drone has a serious battlefield limitation that it's extremely vulnerable while positioning to drop it's munition. Very good against something that can't defend itself (we have a lot of video of them dropping stuff into tanks that the crew bailed out of for some reason), but the cost mounts quickly if a soldier with a shotgun can engage it.
pjc50 1y ago
Western militaries have things like this: https://greydynamics.com/switchblade-drone-small-spring-loaded-deadly/ https://greydynamics.com/switchblade-drone-small-spring-load... More autonomy, but MUCH more expensive. Thousands or tens of thousands of dollars per use. The issue is indeed using mass-produced consumer drones. It's a bit like the widespread use of "technicals" in some conflicts: yes, a pickup truck with a .50cal in the back is inferior to tanks or armored cars, but it's also much, much cheaper. There's a bit of a "Sherman vs. Tiger" thing that's been going on since the dawn of industrialised warfare. Is it better to have a more effective weapon that you can only afford a few of, or lots of cheaper ones? The US doctrine approach to the problem would simply be a set of B2 bunker buster decapitation strikes on Russian military HQs, but of course that option is not available to Ukraine. They can't even manage Iraq-war-style wave of SEAD strikes followed by unit level CAS. The air war has kind of stalemated with neither side having conventional air superiority and both being vulnerable to the other's anti-air.
- daemontus 1y ago
  Ah, the age old question of "1 horse-sized duck vs. 100 duck-sized horses"...
  - 0cf8612b2e1e 1y ago
    This is a Zerg vs Protoss debate.
    - more_corn 1y ago
      Best strategy is Protoss + Zerg. What if toss could field some zerglings along with the expensive OP weapons?
- sensanaty 1y ago
  Slightly unrelated, but reading the "product" page is crazy to me. So much about lethal radii, kill zones and stuff like that. Wild, couldn't ever picture myself working on something like this and sleeping well at night
ashoeafoot 1y ago
Also, the tech hurdles can easy be overcome with motherships as relays?
xg15 1y ago
Given that the drones he talks about are even less equipped than a standard hobbyist drone (no GPS, no compass), I suppose it's more a "tradeoff" between keeping the drone cheap enough to be disposable vs having enough functionality to be practically controllable by the operator.

palata 1y ago

> Many of the issues sound like issues coming from using improvised civilian hobbyist tech I don't think it's improvised civilian hobbyist tech. They run autopilots that also fly professional drones and can fly planes. I think it's mostly that it has to be super cheap, otherwise it doesn't bring value (because other weapons are more efficient if you have more money). If your one-way drone costs 10k dollars, maybe it's too expensive even though it can fly during the night. And then there are fundamental limitations, like flying in bad weather. > obviously the next stage is a FPV drone with some capabilities of "reusable" drone But a reusable drone won't go inside a hangar (because at this point it probably won't come out). If your drone can go somewhere, drop something and come back, doesn't it mean that another class of weapons could do this job?

spwa4 1y ago
Sadly I think that AI will make a very large difference here. And AI hardware that can control weapons is already hundreds of dollars and dropping fast, because a cell phone can do it.
- Nicook 1y ago
  [flagged]
bluGill 1y ago
$10,000 can be cheap for a one way drone. Bombs often cost for more than that. The real question is value, if hitting the target is worth more than the cost of what you hit it with then you have a good value. Taking out a $1000 drone with a $100,000 missile is a good value if that drone is headed for a $1,000,000 building, but if the drone is headed for a cow probably not worth it.
- palata 1y ago
  Sure. But isn't that the point of the article? That the author is not sure if they bring as much value as advertised?
LorenPechtel 1y ago
And the reusable drone has a serious battlefield limitation that it's extremely vulnerable while positioning to drop it's munition. Very good against something that can't defend itself (we have a lot of video of them dropping stuff into tanks that the crew bailed out of for some reason), but the cost mounts quickly if a soldier with a shotgun can engage it.

pjc50 1y ago

Western militaries have things like this: https://greydynamics.com/switchblade-drone-small-spring-loaded-deadly/ https://greydynamics.com/switchblade-drone-small-spring-load... More autonomy, but MUCH more expensive. Thousands or tens of thousands of dollars per use. The issue is indeed using mass-produced consumer drones. It's a bit like the widespread use of "technicals" in some conflicts: yes, a pickup truck with a .50cal in the back is inferior to tanks or armored cars, but it's also much, much cheaper. There's a bit of a "Sherman vs. Tiger" thing that's been going on since the dawn of industrialised warfare. Is it better to have a more effective weapon that you can only afford a few of, or lots of cheaper ones? The US doctrine approach to the problem would simply be a set of B2 bunker buster decapitation strikes on Russian military HQs, but of course that option is not available to Ukraine. They can't even manage Iraq-war-style wave of SEAD strikes followed by unit level CAS. The air war has kind of stalemated with neither side having conventional air superiority and both being vulnerable to the other's anti-air.

daemontus 1y ago
Ah, the age old question of "1 horse-sized duck vs. 100 duck-sized horses"...
- 0cf8612b2e1e 1y ago
  This is a Zerg vs Protoss debate.
  - more_corn 1y ago
    Best strategy is Protoss + Zerg. What if toss could field some zerglings along with the expensive OP weapons?
sensanaty 1y ago
Slightly unrelated, but reading the "product" page is crazy to me. So much about lethal radii, kill zones and stuff like that. Wild, couldn't ever picture myself working on something like this and sleeping well at night

ashoeafoot 1y ago

Also, the tech hurdles can easy be overcome with motherships as relays?

xg15 1y ago

Given that the drones he talks about are even less equipped than a standard hobbyist drone (no GPS, no compass), I suppose it's more a "tradeoff" between keeping the drone cheap enough to be disposable vs having enough functionality to be practically controllable by the operator.