3 ms·

The current conflict hasn't seen the best employment of loitering munitions, from both sides actually. Maybe as a function of the current paradigm (artillery du

The current conflict hasn't seen the best employment of loitering munitions, from both sides actually. Maybe as a function of the current paradigm (artillery duel), the low yield explosive of the S 300 fielded, or lack of experienced fixed wing drone operators, in comparison with multi-rotor drones, which are retrievable with much longer flight times. Tube launched loitering munitions are the future nonetheless and will replace the mortar and multi rotor drones, once all the issues have been figured out.

zmgsabst 4y ago
I think the bigger impact will be when the larger variants are deployed among artillery. We already have artillery that can reach 50-100km, but when that can be used to deploy drones with payloads capable of destroying tanks — then your entire style of fighting can change. I actually wonder if this will bring back something like battleships: a 6” gun firing off drones in a 50-100km range would likely be able to penetrate modern point defense and hit critical systems — like radars, point defense, or weapons. At least, as a swarm from a broadside.
- happyopossum 4y ago
  > I actually wonder if this will bring back something like battleships: a 6” gun firing off drones in a 50-100km range would likely be able to penetrate modern point defense and hit critical systems — like radars, point defense, or weapons. At least, as a swarm from a broadside. Battleships have disappeared for several reasons, but the biggest one is that it's an incredibly expensive way (in money and manpower) to launch those 6" (or even much bigger) shells. Changing the value of the shell doesn't change the fact that it's still incredibly expensive. I think we'll be much more likely to see these launched in swarms from other aircraft - the Air Force is already exploring what they refer to as Arsenal Planes, which are basically cargo planes with the ability to launch or drop tons (literally) of long range munitions. These aircraft would remain hundreds of miles from contested airspace and still be able to bring hell down on a target. Something like the Switchblade 600, launched by the dozens and controlled en-masse by either in-craft or remote pilots would be the modern version of launching these from the Mighty Mo's main cannon.
  - zmgsabst 4y ago
    I hadn’t meant battleship in the sense of a large capital ship, but rather something largely automated with a dozen guns/barrels. And volleys in the 100-200 munition range, where you can saturate and push through point defense. My sense of it is that such a ship would be able to engage at a range and volume of fire a lot of current navies would struggle to counter, but I’ll admit that’s more feeling than demonstrated fact. Though, a plane is never going to hold the sheer volume of munitions a ship does: they have to fly and they’re smaller craft. And since Switchblade 600 has a 40km range, you’d have to take your plane awfully close for that plan — whereas artillery extends that. Arsenal Planes are still a good idea though.
- gpderetta 4y ago
  But artillery is already more than capable of killing tanks. Terminal guidance for artillery shells is likely to make more of a difference. On the other hand drones appear to be excellent for directing artillery and general reconnaissance.
  - zmgsabst 4y ago
    Sure — but now we’re into debating the difference between a shell with terminal guidance and steering versus a drone. Over my head. Though if you want to say the difference is powered flight, that’s probably a good distinction… but I think powered terminal guidance is worth a lot when you’re shooting 50-100km at potentially moving targets.

zmgsabst 4y ago

I think the bigger impact will be when the larger variants are deployed among artillery. We already have artillery that can reach 50-100km, but when that can be used to deploy drones with payloads capable of destroying tanks — then your entire style of fighting can change. I actually wonder if this will bring back something like battleships: a 6” gun firing off drones in a 50-100km range would likely be able to penetrate modern point defense and hit critical systems — like radars, point defense, or weapons. At least, as a swarm from a broadside.

happyopossum 4y ago
> I actually wonder if this will bring back something like battleships: a 6” gun firing off drones in a 50-100km range would likely be able to penetrate modern point defense and hit critical systems — like radars, point defense, or weapons. At least, as a swarm from a broadside. Battleships have disappeared for several reasons, but the biggest one is that it's an incredibly expensive way (in money and manpower) to launch those 6" (or even much bigger) shells. Changing the value of the shell doesn't change the fact that it's still incredibly expensive. I think we'll be much more likely to see these launched in swarms from other aircraft - the Air Force is already exploring what they refer to as Arsenal Planes, which are basically cargo planes with the ability to launch or drop tons (literally) of long range munitions. These aircraft would remain hundreds of miles from contested airspace and still be able to bring hell down on a target. Something like the Switchblade 600, launched by the dozens and controlled en-masse by either in-craft or remote pilots would be the modern version of launching these from the Mighty Mo's main cannon.
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  I hadn’t meant battleship in the sense of a large capital ship, but rather something largely automated with a dozen guns/barrels. And volleys in the 100-200 munition range, where you can saturate and push through point defense. My sense of it is that such a ship would be able to engage at a range and volume of fire a lot of current navies would struggle to counter, but I’ll admit that’s more feeling than demonstrated fact. Though, a plane is never going to hold the sheer volume of munitions a ship does: they have to fly and they’re smaller craft. And since Switchblade 600 has a 40km range, you’d have to take your plane awfully close for that plan — whereas artillery extends that. Arsenal Planes are still a good idea though.
gpderetta 4y ago
But artillery is already more than capable of killing tanks. Terminal guidance for artillery shells is likely to make more of a difference. On the other hand drones appear to be excellent for directing artillery and general reconnaissance.
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  Sure — but now we’re into debating the difference between a shell with terminal guidance and steering versus a drone. Over my head. Though if you want to say the difference is powered flight, that’s probably a good distinction… but I think powered terminal guidance is worth a lot when you’re shooting 50-100km at potentially moving targets.