4 ms·

"This is to bullets and shells what bullets and shells were to pikes." Mainly these drones are for scouting and directing the shells of the artillery and the b

"This is to bullets and shells what bullets and shells were to pikes." Mainly these drones are for scouting and directing the shells of the artillery and the bullets of the soldiers, so I am not sure the comparison is adequate as they are not making the shells obsolete. Once they are so cheap, that a drone with explosive is cheaper than an artillery round, they might make artillery obsolete, but so far they are strenghtening the value of artillery.

dredmorbius 4y ago
Drones obviously provide several capabilities. One of those is precise pinpoint attacks. Russia's extraordinarily high losses of senior general staff officers would highlight these capabilities. The ability to identify, inderdict, and disable high-capital equipment (e.g., tanks, the Moskova missile cruiser, another. There's an interesting observation in an unusual source that I've had come to mind: Regularity, order, and prompt obedience to command are qualities which, in modern armies, are of more importance towards determining the fate of battles than the dexterity and skill of the soldiers in the use of their arms. But the noise of firearms, the smoke, and the invisible death to which every man feels himself every moment exposed as soon as he comes within cannon-shot, and frequently a long time before the battle can be well said to be engaged, must render it very difficult to maintain any considerable degree of this regularity, order, and prompt obedience, even in the beginning of a modern battle. In an ancient battle there was no noise but what arose from the human voice; there was no smoke, there was no invisible cause of wounds or death. -- Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_V/Chapter_1 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_V/... Smith discusses the earlier realm of shorter-ranged and melee weapons as well. Bullets have typically required soldiers somewhere in the immediate region, at distances of a few tens, hundreds, or at the extreme, a thousand or so metres. Artillery has longer range but has typically required larger launch systems, even where those are portable. Human-portable drones extend range to tens or hundreds of km with loitering and seeking capabilities. Again, the range of peril is extended greatly.
nine_k 4y ago
An artillery round flies much, much faster, supersonic for a good part of the trajectory. It hits a target 10-15 km away in well under a minute. A drone would take 10-20 minutes to cover such a distance, and it would likely be easier to spot and destroy while en route, even if it tries to fly low and maneuver.
- dredmorbius 4y ago
  Artillery rounds follow ballistic trajectories, and though interdicting the shell itself is challenging, plotting trajectory to origin makes counter-battery fire quite effecitve. Howizters and Panzerhaubitzen have greater strategic value than single shells do. Drones can fly non-predictable paths, and single-use drones don't pave a lane back to origin.
- hutzlibu 4y ago
  "A drone would take 10-20 minutes to cover such a distance" The strategy would be swarms of drones, who hibernate somewhere in enemy territory and gets activated once needed. Also, you can have different propulsions, so in the end, basically have smart amunition/rockets. But like I said, so far the artillery is not going away anytime soon.

dredmorbius 4y ago

Drones obviously provide several capabilities. One of those is precise pinpoint attacks. Russia's extraordinarily high losses of senior general staff officers would highlight these capabilities. The ability to identify, inderdict, and disable high-capital equipment (e.g., tanks, the Moskova missile cruiser, another. There's an interesting observation in an unusual source that I've had come to mind: Regularity, order, and prompt obedience to command are qualities which, in modern armies, are of more importance towards determining the fate of battles than the dexterity and skill of the soldiers in the use of their arms. But the noise of firearms, the smoke, and the invisible death to which every man feels himself every moment exposed as soon as he comes within cannon-shot, and frequently a long time before the battle can be well said to be engaged, must render it very difficult to maintain any considerable degree of this regularity, order, and prompt obedience, even in the beginning of a modern battle. In an ancient battle there was no noise but what arose from the human voice; there was no smoke, there was no invisible cause of wounds or death. -- Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_V/Chapter_1 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_V/... Smith discusses the earlier realm of shorter-ranged and melee weapons as well. Bullets have typically required soldiers somewhere in the immediate region, at distances of a few tens, hundreds, or at the extreme, a thousand or so metres. Artillery has longer range but has typically required larger launch systems, even where those are portable. Human-portable drones extend range to tens or hundreds of km with loitering and seeking capabilities. Again, the range of peril is extended greatly.

nine_k 4y ago

An artillery round flies much, much faster, supersonic for a good part of the trajectory. It hits a target 10-15 km away in well under a minute. A drone would take 10-20 minutes to cover such a distance, and it would likely be easier to spot and destroy while en route, even if it tries to fly low and maneuver.

dredmorbius 4y ago
Artillery rounds follow ballistic trajectories, and though interdicting the shell itself is challenging, plotting trajectory to origin makes counter-battery fire quite effecitve. Howizters and Panzerhaubitzen have greater strategic value than single shells do. Drones can fly non-predictable paths, and single-use drones don't pave a lane back to origin.
hutzlibu 4y ago
"A drone would take 10-20 minutes to cover such a distance" The strategy would be swarms of drones, who hibernate somewhere in enemy territory and gets activated once needed. Also, you can have different propulsions, so in the end, basically have smart amunition/rockets. But like I said, so far the artillery is not going away anytime soon.