5 ms·

> A moving quad is really hard to hit by gun A properly trained human with a military rifle can hit a quad easily. A FCS controlling a military gun does mince

> A moving quad is really hard to hit by gun A properly trained human with a military rifle can hit a quad easily. A FCS controlling a military gun does mince meat of them. > A racing style quad is way more nimble than any winged aircraft I have every flown or seen. That has zero carrying capacity. Even then, you clearly haven’t flown or seen much if you are impressed by the manoeuvrability of a quad. A fixed wing drone will just toy with it. Quads, even racing quads, are unbelievably slow. That’s inherent to their design. > The only practical limit on quad max altitude is the FAA/DJI control limitation which are easily bypassed on my quad. You are confused about what kind of altitude we are talking about here. > The only real challenge is getting in the flight path of said Iranian drone. The only real challenge to going to the Moon is jumping high enough. There is a reason quads are not used offensively and it’s not because no one thought about it.

nine_k 4y ago
Frankly, quads are used offensively, and there is a ton of videos from Ukraine showing quads dropping small bombs onto valuable targets. But this is usually not a frontline operation. Quads penetrate to the rear where ammo warehouses are, or find small groups preparing an ambush, etc. They are typically not used against moving targets, or heavily armored targets. With all their shortcomings, quad copters have two advantages: they are much less optically prominent, and they can hover over a target, allowing the operator to hit it exactly at an opportune moment.
consumer451 4y ago
> > A moving quad is really hard to hit by gun > A properly trained human with a military rifle can hit a quad easily. A FCS controlling a military gun does mince meat of them. I honestly have no idea where you started on this. I was talking about defensive use of quads to foul the propulsion system of another aircraft. > There is a reason quads are not used offensively and it’s not because no one thought about it. Again, I am talking about AA, (Anti-Aircraft) weapons to take out incoming cruise missiles or Iranian drones. This is a DEFENSIVE tool. However, you have to work pretty hard to avoid the fact that there are hundreds of videos of drones being used offensively in UA. Additionally, welcome to 2023 [0]. >You are confused about what kind of altitude we are talking about here. There are dozens of videos of Iranian drones flying at altitudes where UA soldiers are shooting at them with rifles. It looks like the altitudes are sub 1000m, easily. Any quadcopter can hit an altitude of 1000m with a simple checkbox unchecked. The range is no problem, the air density is no problem. You good sir or madame, are the one who is confused on this topic, or at least thread. If I was previously unclear, I hope to have addressed that in this comment. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4McPHBQ9pNw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4McPHBQ9pNw
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  > I honestly have no idea where you started on this. I was talking about defensive use of quads to foul the propulsion system of another aircraft. You were replying to one of my comment explaining that drones are not good for offensive action because they are vulnerable. Also there is no point in trying to foul a propulsion system. That’s extremely unlikely to happen and there are simpler way to disable an aircraft (like just having it collide with something). > There are dozens of videos of Iranian drones flying at altitudes where UA soldiers are shooting at them with rifles. It looks like the altitudes are sub 1000m, easily. Low flying aircrafts which can be shot at are easy to disable with traditional canons. That’s cheap and effective. Why do you want to use quadcopters for that? That never was the point.

nine_k 4y ago

Frankly, quads are used offensively, and there is a ton of videos from Ukraine showing quads dropping small bombs onto valuable targets. But this is usually not a frontline operation. Quads penetrate to the rear where ammo warehouses are, or find small groups preparing an ambush, etc. They are typically not used against moving targets, or heavily armored targets. With all their shortcomings, quad copters have two advantages: they are much less optically prominent, and they can hover over a target, allowing the operator to hit it exactly at an opportune moment.

consumer451 4y ago

> > A moving quad is really hard to hit by gun > A properly trained human with a military rifle can hit a quad easily. A FCS controlling a military gun does mince meat of them. I honestly have no idea where you started on this. I was talking about defensive use of quads to foul the propulsion system of another aircraft. > There is a reason quads are not used offensively and it’s not because no one thought about it. Again, I am talking about AA, (Anti-Aircraft) weapons to take out incoming cruise missiles or Iranian drones. This is a DEFENSIVE tool. However, you have to work pretty hard to avoid the fact that there are hundreds of videos of drones being used offensively in UA. Additionally, welcome to 2023 [0]. >You are confused about what kind of altitude we are talking about here. There are dozens of videos of Iranian drones flying at altitudes where UA soldiers are shooting at them with rifles. It looks like the altitudes are sub 1000m, easily. Any quadcopter can hit an altitude of 1000m with a simple checkbox unchecked. The range is no problem, the air density is no problem. You good sir or madame, are the one who is confused on this topic, or at least thread. If I was previously unclear, I hope to have addressed that in this comment. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4McPHBQ9pNw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4McPHBQ9pNw

WastingMyTime89 4y ago
> I honestly have no idea where you started on this. I was talking about defensive use of quads to foul the propulsion system of another aircraft. You were replying to one of my comment explaining that drones are not good for offensive action because they are vulnerable. Also there is no point in trying to foul a propulsion system. That’s extremely unlikely to happen and there are simpler way to disable an aircraft (like just having it collide with something). > There are dozens of videos of Iranian drones flying at altitudes where UA soldiers are shooting at them with rifles. It looks like the altitudes are sub 1000m, easily. Low flying aircrafts which can be shot at are easy to disable with traditional canons. That’s cheap and effective. Why do you want to use quadcopters for that? That never was the point.