5 ms·
It's a very solvable problem though. At least for countries other than Russia, which might not be technically nimble enough to adapt mid-conflict and under a st
by stult 4y ago
It's a very solvable problem though. At least for countries other than Russia, which might not be technically nimble enough to adapt mid-conflict and under a strong sanctions regime. S-300s/S-400s/Buks and the somewhat rarer western equivalents like the Patriot system just aren't designed to target something flying that slow with that small of a radar cross section. That doesn't mean the drones aren't reasonably easy to detect and target, just that the targeting systems need to be fine-tuned a little.
I doubt NATO would have this problem, not only because Turkey is part of NATO but because US tactics would probably be more effective against similar drones. We rely on fighters to establish air superiority more than SAMs, while the Russians do the opposite. Worst case scenario, F-15s/16s/22s/35s can use cannons and pilots are more adaptable than radar systems. I also suspect that the F-35's sensors at least are far superior to whatever the Russians are relying on.
I am also somewhat suspicious of the reports we have heard about them striking deep within Russian territory. Not because I doubt their veracity, but because I am certain we are not getting all of the relevant information. I wouldn't be surprised to find out if there was some supplementary SEAD (suppression of enemy air defense) going on that Ukraine and its western allies are remaining tight lipped about. It wouldn't shock me to find out that NATO has some clever trick for blinding Russian SAM radar in a way that the Russians haven't figured out yet. The Russians would never ever admit the existence of such a capability publicly because it would totally destroy demand for their military exports, and NATO wouldn't want to tip their hand in anyway that would give the Russians an opportunity to adapt.
- gpderetta 4y agoThe problem is that I think it is very hard for a modern fighter jet to engage a slow and low drone with a cannon. Probably it is easier with missles, but not very cost effective. Probably anti-drone drones or some sort of CIWS is going more effective.
- stult 4y agoI mentioned cannons as the absolute worst case option in case US air-to-air missiles suffer from the same issues as Russian SAMs appear to, and from the perspective of extant US capabilities that could be adapted and rapidly fielded for immediate use. My ultimate point being that we're just way better positioned to handle these drones right now and into the near future than the Russians are or will be.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago> We rely on fighters to establish air superiority more than SAMs, while the Russians do the opposite. Worst case scenario, F-15s/16s/22s/35s can use cannons and pilots are more adaptable than radar systems. I also suspect that the F-35's sensors at least are far superior to whatever the Russians are relying on. Or just, ya know, shoot the damn thing. The specs are well within what you can expect to hit with with an "old enough they give them out like candy" AA gun.
- CMDBob 4y agoThey really aren't. The TB2 can loiter at 18,000 ft, or about 5.5km. 20mm guns max effective range is about 1,500m. 40mm are better, but still max out at about 7,000m. You're not going to be able to hit it. That assumes you can even see it, which you probably can't.