3 ms·

What I've imagined for the past decade or so, are spotter drones that are about the same size as the drones they are design to shoot down. These spotter drones

What I've imagined for the past decade or so, are spotter drones that are about the same size as the drones they are design to shoot down. These spotter drones could be built much like WW1/WW2 aircraft, just much smaller, with top speeds between 50-200knots for the smaller versions. As a weapon, they could carry weapons similar to submachineguns, shotguns or light marchine guns, depending on the size of the target. Add an AI of about the same level of sophistication as the "autopilots" in cars, and they should be able to identify and shoot down hostile drones relatively cost efficiently. Produced at scale, the smallest versions (designed to shoot down comercially available drones, for instance), would not have to cost all that much more than the drones they are designed to shoot down, if produced at scale. I'm imagining at least 3-4 size categories, lets say. 1) Tiny, able to shoot down most quad copters. Top speed of 50-100knots. Price needs to be low enough to allow tens of thousands to be produced. Could potentially also double as anti-infantry weapons by strafing. 2) Small. Able to shoot down switchblade-sized drones. Top speed of maybe 200 knots. Can be produced in numbers of thousands. 3) Medium. Sutable to hunt small UAV's, such as Buyraktar. Top speed of several hundered knots, maybe just below Mach 1. Somewhat more expensive than the Buyraktar, but can also carry some of the same ordanance, like a tiny fighter-bomber. 4) Full-sized, possibly supersonic. Basically the same as the Loyal Wingman concept. Designed to counter other full-sized drones as well as manned aircraft. Basically, the removal of a pilot, allows aircraft to span a wide range of sizes, and I would expect all sizes to be produced, as it is uneconomical to hunt quadcopters with full sized aircraft, while it is impossible to hunt supersonic aircraft with switchblade type aircraft. In a way, this would be analogous to naval vessels, with different sizes serving different roles, from corvettes, MTB's and attacks subs, through frigates and cruisers, to WW2 style batlleships or carriers. Now, for the AI researchers out there, imagine the careers that can be built around providing AI's for these vehicles. To see your own AI locked in a WW2 style dogfight with a similar drone from another country, in a real-time feed.....

hooande 4y ago
Human drone pilots are cheap and reasonably easy to train. The "AI" that you need is the targeting and guidance system. If I can see any enemy drone on a camera, all I need to do is get a lock and fire. The problem is that precision guided munitions are fairly expensive. Drones are cheap, but giving them any kind of offensive ability increases the cost significantly. A switchblade drone only costs about $6,000 and there still aren't swarms of thousands of them. Maybe once the economics enable massing hundreds of thousands of drones, autonomous control will become more reasonable.
- trashtester 4y ago
  > The problem is that precision guided munitions are fairly expensive. Drones are cheap, but giving them any kind of offensive ability increases the cost significantly. A switchblade drone only costs about $6,000 and there still aren't swarms of thousands of them. Maybe once the economics enable massing hundreds of thousands of drones, autonomous control will become more reasonable. Exactly this. How many drones can you get for the price of 100 F35's? If you get that many drones, you want to have drones that can attack both enemy land units AND enemy drones.
nradov 4y ago
This is just silly and unrealistic. You have completely neglected detection and targeting issues. What types of sensors would be needed? What field of view do they have? How much power do they consume? How much does that sensor suite cost?
- trashtester 4y ago
  I answered a lot of this in another subthread. Here I will just provide a couple of links to a couple of anti-air drone systems under development: > But concepts that would fall under this class are under development. One relativly large example is Baykar Bayraktar Kızılelma: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baykar_Bayraktar_K%C4%B1z%C4%B https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baykar_Bayraktar_K%C4%B1z%C4%B... > This one is a hybrid drone, capable of both anti-air and anti-ground missions. It would fall under what I would consider "medium" size. > Here is an early model of a Russian attempt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcAqF5BVLU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcAqF5BVLU4
  - nradov 4y ago
    You haven't actually answered anything. Sure it's theoretically possible to build a large, fast UCAV with advanced sensors. But it will be nearly as expensive as current manned fighters, and still not very useful at countering small, low-altitude drones.
    - trashtester 4y ago
      Which is why I (a few posts up) argued that several size categories of drones are needed. To counter the the small, low altitude drones, I argue for similarly small drones to be used. To counter a drone that costs $500-$5000 to make, one should build drones that cost $1000-$10000 (possibly a bit more expensive when adjusting for R&D and military inefficiency). These will not carry more advanced sensors than what you see on a modern car, primarily a few optical cameras. Since one can built A LOT of such small drones (10s or 100s of thousand, if needed), they can be spread out along a frontline. They would be carried in a manner similar to switchblade drones or mounted on vehicles, and take off when a threat is detected in the vicinity. A drone (or a small swarm) would search for the enemy drone using primarily optical (including IR), and try to shoot it down WW1/WW2 style. And, like manned fighters, they would not be restricted to purely defensive missions. These drones could also double as recon craft, do strafing against infantry or even carry small grenades or bombs. Since these would be recoverable, it would be fine to use a $10000 drone to shoot down a $500 drone, instead of using a stinger missile. Larger drones would be available in smaller numbers, but those would primarily be used vs larger drones and manned aircraft.

hooande 4y ago

Human drone pilots are cheap and reasonably easy to train. The "AI" that you need is the targeting and guidance system. If I can see any enemy drone on a camera, all I need to do is get a lock and fire. The problem is that precision guided munitions are fairly expensive. Drones are cheap, but giving them any kind of offensive ability increases the cost significantly. A switchblade drone only costs about $6,000 and there still aren't swarms of thousands of them. Maybe once the economics enable massing hundreds of thousands of drones, autonomous control will become more reasonable.

trashtester 4y ago
> The problem is that precision guided munitions are fairly expensive. Drones are cheap, but giving them any kind of offensive ability increases the cost significantly. A switchblade drone only costs about $6,000 and there still aren't swarms of thousands of them. Maybe once the economics enable massing hundreds of thousands of drones, autonomous control will become more reasonable. Exactly this. How many drones can you get for the price of 100 F35's? If you get that many drones, you want to have drones that can attack both enemy land units AND enemy drones.

nradov 4y ago

This is just silly and unrealistic. You have completely neglected detection and targeting issues. What types of sensors would be needed? What field of view do they have? How much power do they consume? How much does that sensor suite cost?

trashtester 4y ago
I answered a lot of this in another subthread. Here I will just provide a couple of links to a couple of anti-air drone systems under development: > But concepts that would fall under this class are under development. One relativly large example is Baykar Bayraktar Kızılelma: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baykar_Bayraktar_K%C4%B1z%C4%B https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baykar_Bayraktar_K%C4%B1z%C4%B... > This one is a hybrid drone, capable of both anti-air and anti-ground missions. It would fall under what I would consider "medium" size. > Here is an early model of a Russian attempt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcAqF5BVLU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcAqF5BVLU4
- nradov 4y ago
  You haven't actually answered anything. Sure it's theoretically possible to build a large, fast UCAV with advanced sensors. But it will be nearly as expensive as current manned fighters, and still not very useful at countering small, low-altitude drones.
  - trashtester 4y ago
    Which is why I (a few posts up) argued that several size categories of drones are needed. To counter the the small, low altitude drones, I argue for similarly small drones to be used. To counter a drone that costs $500-$5000 to make, one should build drones that cost $1000-$10000 (possibly a bit more expensive when adjusting for R&D and military inefficiency). These will not carry more advanced sensors than what you see on a modern car, primarily a few optical cameras. Since one can built A LOT of such small drones (10s or 100s of thousand, if needed), they can be spread out along a frontline. They would be carried in a manner similar to switchblade drones or mounted on vehicles, and take off when a threat is detected in the vicinity. A drone (or a small swarm) would search for the enemy drone using primarily optical (including IR), and try to shoot it down WW1/WW2 style. And, like manned fighters, they would not be restricted to purely defensive missions. These drones could also double as recon craft, do strafing against infantry or even carry small grenades or bombs. Since these would be recoverable, it would be fine to use a $10000 drone to shoot down a $500 drone, instead of using a stinger missile. Larger drones would be available in smaller numbers, but those would primarily be used vs larger drones and manned aircraft.