4 ms·
If you're shooting at a cheap drone with a million-dollar-missile - it's because you don't have anything more appropriate at the right place to defend a high-va
by ajuc 2y ago
If you're shooting at a cheap drone with a million-dollar-missile - it's because you don't have anything more appropriate at the right place to defend a high-value target. The appropriate solution right now is AA artillery (Gepard or ZS-23-2 or -4, etc.) or electronic jammers.
You don't have them near the high-value target right now because it's simply too expansive to build enough of these to cover all the thousands of kms of frontline and thousands of high-value targets all over the country. So you put them where they are most needed and cover the rest with long-range missiles.
I'm pretty sure AA cannon is cheaper to build than this RFDEW device. If you can't build enough AA to defend against drones now - you won't be able to build enough RFDEW either. Yes operating costs will be lower, but initial cost will be higher, so you still won't have enough of them.
So you'd still need to use the long-range missiles to deal with the drones that slipped through the gaps.
BTW I do hope they can improve the range, but as is it's not going to replace long-range missiles.
- riku_iki 2y ago> I'm pretty sure AA cannon is cheaper to build than this RFDEW device I suspect AA cannon may suffer in accuracy on such ranges trying to target small moving target, because too much physics is involved (wind, bullet drop), from another hand those beaming devices will have near 100% accuracy.
- verdverm 2y agoyup, they need to be highly mobile for an environment like Ukraine, where they put flak AA on technicals and use phones on 6' polls to locate shaheds This seems like a good, ship mounted, close range AA option
- verdverm 2y ago> If you're shooting at a cheap drone with a million-dollar-missile - ... to defend a high-value target. The cost of the drone is less important than the price of what you are protecting