6 ms·

I've thought that drone swarms are an "obviously" good idea, but that assumed that the communications/navigation were not easily spoofed. Then Iran captured on

by bertjk 8y ago

I've thought that drone swarms are an "obviously" good idea, but that assumed that the communications/navigation were not easily spoofed. Then Iran captured one of the US's most advanced drone, pretty much intact. Now I'm not so sure.

stcredzero 8y ago
Air superiority basically means being able to deny airspace to your enemy's forces while ensuring the safety of your own air assets. What if we developed swarms of drones to the point where both sides could ensure the destruction of anything flying in contested airspace, but not ensure the safety of anything flying? Maybe warfare will return to a static mode, like WWI, but with much deadlier weapons, including automated AI area denial tanks and swarms of suicidal aerial drones.
- sitkack 8y ago
  At the same time it will shoot sub-prime mortgages directly into the Wells Fargo accounts of the enemy. Interesting times indeed. If WW1 was facilitated by the telegraph, WW3 will be lubricated by Twitter.
  - m1573rp34130dy 8y ago
    if you are joking this is humorous... but this is also serious reality that you have commented about, it is a feasible thing with sufficient sophisocation... ...the economic system is a vital leverage point...
- rch 8y ago
  That pretty much sums up the endgame with Anti-access Area Denial (A2/AD) strategy: https://www.sto.nato.int/SitePages/newsitem.aspx?ID=3546 https://www.sto.nato.int/SitePages/newsitem.aspx?ID=3546
- hindsightbias 8y ago
  The capabilites to deny airspace to something like an F-22 would be pretty high/expensive. AA missiles are expensive to buy, deploy and maintain and they probably haven't gotten cheaper over time. Their true effectiveness in a peer-to-peer contest is unknown or only known to a select few with access. Drones would likely not be cheaper than AAM. But swarms could change the whole anti-personnel/troop exposure calculation, so it might make mute using super-platforms for air support. Flying IEDs is a lot easier to imagine than an F-22/35 killer (that are in the air, at least).
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    Drones would likely not be cheaper than AAM. Right. In a way, that's part of the point. AAM are constrained to me munitions. They are expensive, but need to be far cheaper than the aircraft they are launched from, because the missiles are meant to be expended and the aircraft is meant to return. Swarms of suicide drones running tactics of area denial could be made at many different levels of capability and expense. make mute (Make moot.) Flying IEDs is a lot easier to imagine than an F-22/35 killer (that are in the air, at least). AAM are already flying explosive devices. Drones might well still carry AAMs, but be able to operate in a "mutual destruction" mode, sacrificing themselves to make a shot on a more expensive aircraft. AI programmers for fighter drones might well build in economic decisions. "Suicide for the kill, but only when the target is more expensive than yourself."
    - m1573rp34130dy 8y ago
      they have been imagined and created and used in venezuela... https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45077057 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45077057 [dupl] ...also, i wonder what a wardrone does to a fighter jet when its titanium chassis is sucked into the engine :-/
      - 15155 8y ago
        Considering the fact that organic geese will handily destroy aircraft turbines, I'd hazard to guess that a metal drone loaded with fuel and explosive armaments would also do a fair bit of damage.
- m1573rp34130dy 8y ago
  its happening, its not maybe [probably]... https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45077057 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45077057 from daily mail[meh], but a counterpoint and illustration of the weaponization of information that is happening... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6027507/Venezuelan-President-Nicolas-Maduro-survives-alleged-drone-assassination-attempt.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6027507/Venezuelan-P...
ant6n 8y ago
multi-spectrum laser communication!
- greedo 8y ago
  Clouds...
Tobba_ 8y ago
The idea of drone swarms doesn't go well together with aerodynamics and basic physical intuition. If you shrink an aircraft down, the aerodynamic cross-section (i.e the drag force) scales with the area (scale^2), but your engine thrust is going to drop roughly by the decrease in volume (scale^3). So you end up losing maximum airspeed and fuel efficiency (in terms of the mass you're moving) the smaller you go. Unless the drones in your swarm were really big, it doesn't work out. Although, I imagine we'll see some smaller, unmanned jet fighters in the future (assuming someone figures out how to control something like that remotely, or autonomously). A smaller aircraft has the advantage of a smaller radar cross-section and being more difficult to hit. Doing away with the pilot cuts out a lot of weight and frees up room for a larger engine and fuel tank, offseting the downsides of the smaller size somewhat. There should be a sweet spot where that works out.
- pfschell 8y ago
  Your comment assumes "drone" means anything like we have today. Any fighter designed in the last 40 years could be made substantially better by removing the pilot and everything necessary to keep him alive and in the fight.
- tlb 8y ago
  Aircraft drag is largely from the wings producing lift, which scales with weight (l^3). The drag from the fuselage does scale as l^2, but most drones have small fuselages since they don't need room for a pilot and (for fighter planes) a big glass canopy, and lifting drag dominates.
- Someone1234 8y ago
  > If you shrink an aircraft down, the aerodynamic cross-section (i.e the drag force) scales with the area (scale^2), but your engine thrust is going to drop roughly by the decrease in volume (scale^3). Why would we shrink drones down? You read drone swarm and assumed small, but most swarm proposals are using drones of a similar size as today or even large in some cases. They're swarms because of the way they interact with one another, and overwhelm enemy defensive systems, not because they're small.
oh_sigh 8y ago
The comms are encrypted with rotatable keys, so Iran would not be able to spoof that kind of traffic even if they capture a device.
- greedo 8y ago
  They don't need to spoof your comms to deny you said comms. All they need is a good jamming system. If you have no comms to your drone, then you're toast.
  - oh_sigh 8y ago
    Sure, but they don't need to capture a drone to figure out how to jam its radios.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]

by bertjk 8y ago

stcredzero 8y ago

Air superiority basically means being able to deny airspace to your enemy's forces while ensuring the safety of your own air assets. What if we developed swarms of drones to the point where both sides could ensure the destruction of anything flying in contested airspace, but not ensure the safety of anything flying? Maybe warfare will return to a static mode, like WWI, but with much deadlier weapons, including automated AI area denial tanks and swarms of suicidal aerial drones.

sitkack 8y ago
At the same time it will shoot sub-prime mortgages directly into the Wells Fargo accounts of the enemy. Interesting times indeed. If WW1 was facilitated by the telegraph, WW3 will be lubricated by Twitter.
- m1573rp34130dy 8y ago
  if you are joking this is humorous... but this is also serious reality that you have commented about, it is a feasible thing with sufficient sophisocation... ...the economic system is a vital leverage point...
rch 8y ago
That pretty much sums up the endgame with Anti-access Area Denial (A2/AD) strategy: https://www.sto.nato.int/SitePages/newsitem.aspx?ID=3546 https://www.sto.nato.int/SitePages/newsitem.aspx?ID=3546
hindsightbias 8y ago
The capabilites to deny airspace to something like an F-22 would be pretty high/expensive. AA missiles are expensive to buy, deploy and maintain and they probably haven't gotten cheaper over time. Their true effectiveness in a peer-to-peer contest is unknown or only known to a select few with access. Drones would likely not be cheaper than AAM. But swarms could change the whole anti-personnel/troop exposure calculation, so it might make mute using super-platforms for air support. Flying IEDs is a lot easier to imagine than an F-22/35 killer (that are in the air, at least).
- stcredzero 8y ago
  Drones would likely not be cheaper than AAM. Right. In a way, that's part of the point. AAM are constrained to me munitions. They are expensive, but need to be far cheaper than the aircraft they are launched from, because the missiles are meant to be expended and the aircraft is meant to return. Swarms of suicide drones running tactics of area denial could be made at many different levels of capability and expense. make mute (Make moot.) Flying IEDs is a lot easier to imagine than an F-22/35 killer (that are in the air, at least). AAM are already flying explosive devices. Drones might well still carry AAMs, but be able to operate in a "mutual destruction" mode, sacrificing themselves to make a shot on a more expensive aircraft. AI programmers for fighter drones might well build in economic decisions. "Suicide for the kill, but only when the target is more expensive than yourself."
  - m1573rp34130dy 8y ago
    they have been imagined and created and used in venezuela... https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45077057 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45077057 [dupl] ...also, i wonder what a wardrone does to a fighter jet when its titanium chassis is sucked into the engine :-/
    - 15155 8y ago
      Considering the fact that organic geese will handily destroy aircraft turbines, I'd hazard to guess that a metal drone loaded with fuel and explosive armaments would also do a fair bit of damage.
m1573rp34130dy 8y ago
its happening, its not maybe [probably]... https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45077057 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45077057 from daily mail[meh], but a counterpoint and illustration of the weaponization of information that is happening... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6027507/Venezuelan-President-Nicolas-Maduro-survives-alleged-drone-assassination-attempt.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6027507/Venezuelan-P...

ant6n 8y ago

multi-spectrum laser communication!

greedo 8y ago
Clouds...

Tobba_ 8y ago

The idea of drone swarms doesn't go well together with aerodynamics and basic physical intuition. If you shrink an aircraft down, the aerodynamic cross-section (i.e the drag force) scales with the area (scale^2), but your engine thrust is going to drop roughly by the decrease in volume (scale^3). So you end up losing maximum airspeed and fuel efficiency (in terms of the mass you're moving) the smaller you go. Unless the drones in your swarm were really big, it doesn't work out. Although, I imagine we'll see some smaller, unmanned jet fighters in the future (assuming someone figures out how to control something like that remotely, or autonomously). A smaller aircraft has the advantage of a smaller radar cross-section and being more difficult to hit. Doing away with the pilot cuts out a lot of weight and frees up room for a larger engine and fuel tank, offseting the downsides of the smaller size somewhat. There should be a sweet spot where that works out.

pfschell 8y ago
Your comment assumes "drone" means anything like we have today. Any fighter designed in the last 40 years could be made substantially better by removing the pilot and everything necessary to keep him alive and in the fight.
tlb 8y ago
Aircraft drag is largely from the wings producing lift, which scales with weight (l^3). The drag from the fuselage does scale as l^2, but most drones have small fuselages since they don't need room for a pilot and (for fighter planes) a big glass canopy, and lifting drag dominates.
Someone1234 8y ago
> If you shrink an aircraft down, the aerodynamic cross-section (i.e the drag force) scales with the area (scale^2), but your engine thrust is going to drop roughly by the decrease in volume (scale^3). Why would we shrink drones down? You read drone swarm and assumed small, but most swarm proposals are using drones of a similar size as today or even large in some cases. They're swarms because of the way they interact with one another, and overwhelm enemy defensive systems, not because they're small.

oh_sigh 8y ago

The comms are encrypted with rotatable keys, so Iran would not be able to spoof that kind of traffic even if they capture a device.

greedo 8y ago
They don't need to spoof your comms to deny you said comms. All they need is a good jamming system. If you have no comms to your drone, then you're toast.
- oh_sigh 8y ago
  Sure, but they don't need to capture a drone to figure out how to jam its radios.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]