6 ms·

Rheinmetall and Anduril join forces to develop C-sUAS system

55 points by jdmark 2y ago

zer0x4d 2y ago
This is definitely interesting in the face of the news that Ukraine has been using very small FPV drones successfully on the front lines as opposed to more sophisticated systems like the Bayraktar drones. There seems to be a huge gap in air defense systems when it comes to small UAS and this should effectively address that.
- klooney 2y ago
  You have to get the costs balanced too- it can't cost 1 million dollars to kill a 250 dollar drone, for obvious "what if the adversary was China" reasons.
  - jiggawatts 2y ago
    I don't understand why nobody has put auto-shotguns on an tripod with an aiming system, like a mini-CIWS. I've seen Russian soldiers successfully shoot down drones using shotguns, the problem is that the smaller ones can be too fast and nimble for humans to reliably target. Even if you can shoot down 2 of 3, the third one will get you. Combine the YOLO algorithm with a high-frame-rate camera, a two-axis servo, a heavy tripod, and a shotgun... and you're defended! This could be mounted on the back of a tank or humvee also.
    - Arrath 2y ago
      Something like you describe really does sound like an ideal terminal stage defense system, with 20 or 35mm autocannon covering longer ranges. Purely theory crafting, I think the final piece would be small, standalone AESA radar units perhaps the size of a man-carryable generator that can be distributed across a given area and networked to likewise distributed shooters, spreading out the targets, adding redundancy to the system, and reducing the odds of your dugout-with-air-defense-asset getting hit by an anti-radiation munition that homed in on a known emitter.
      - jiggawatts 2y ago
        The reason that you don't need radar for this is that the small suicide drones use cameras (vision) to attack. If you can't see them, they can't see you! Contrast this to general aviation where planes can be kilometers up, behind cloud-cover and can attack you with radar-guided missiles. Radar probably won't have high enough resolution and won't be able to differentiate between drones and birds. Not to mention that most drones are carbon fibre or plastic and won't have much of a radar return to begin with. Conversely, vision systems could be trained to ID drones reliably, and could use data such as the high-frequency "beat" of the propellers to detect drones from just a few pixels of sensor data.
    - nradov 2y ago
      Shotguns have a very limited effective range. Round pellets have a low ballistic coefficient and lose energy quickly. Using larger bore shotguns only delivers marginal range improvements. Automated shotguns might end up being one aspect of SHORAD, but based on recent developments it looks like they'll end up being less important than jammers plus autocannons (short term) and lasers (longer term).
    - YZF 2y ago
      I think many are trying something along these lines. The devil is in the details. The shotgun needs to be reloaded. The system needs to be reasonably reliable and durable. Feels like the range of the shotgun is also a problem. The system needs to have some sort of friend vs. foe identification, possibly not shoot at birds or other random objects. The camera needs to be able to deal with looking at the sun and low light, day and night, likely needs to be able to scan. Pretty soon you get to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS
      - Turing_Machine 2y ago
        > The shotgun needs to be reloaded. Eventually, certainly, but you can put it off for a while without much trouble. You can get 20 round drum magazines for 12 gauge shotguns, and keep hot-swapping 'em until your barrel overheats. > Phalanx_CIWS But that's 1980 technology. I bet a current GPU could outcompute it by orders of magnitude. Range is definitely an issue with shotguns. On the other hand, you're dealing with low-speed drones, not enemy missiles.
        kiba 2y ago
        A Phalanx_CWIS is overkill. Also, I suspected that the system received continuous upgrades throughout the decades. Likewise, the Abrams tanks are cold war era tanks, but they are continuously upgraded that a modern Abrams tank isn't really a 1980 tank. Modernization is likely to remove some weight and make Abrams more survivable against drones, in response to the Russo-Ukrainian war;
        YZF 2y ago
        My point was once you start adapting to all the requirements you inevitably end up with a more complex system. Another thing that happens in a war is that the enemy will adapt to what you're doing. The principles are fine (well, not sure camera is the right only sensor but aside). The actual engineering of a working system you can use in real life is complicated and that's what many are working on. Random similar discussion: https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/anti-drone-weapon-shotgun-turret.1168080/ https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/anti-drone-weapon-sh... I just came back from a walk and someone was flying a drone. Those things are fast, small, highly maneuverable.
- nsguy 2y ago
  Ukraine has been using improvised small FPV drones since Russia invaded pretty much. The Russians in contrast seem to have been using larger drones (like those supplied by Iran). Hezbollah has been attacking Israel from Lebanon for many months now with small drones and the air defence systems like Iron Dome haven't been able to effectively deal with that. One recent example: https://www.timesofisrael.com/hezbollah-swarms-north-with-attack-drones-another-uav-from-iraq-shot-down/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/hezbollah-swarms-north-with-at... There is a major effort right now in Israel to address that gap.
  - dilyevsky 2y ago
    > The Russians in contrast seem to have been using larger drones (like those supplied by Iran). You are confusing short-range and long-range campaigns. Both sides are using fpvs, mavics-style, short-range fixed wing and long-range winged (like shahed-136) drones
    - nsguy 2y ago
      I thought the Russians relied more on military gas powered drones (like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlan-10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlan-10 ) and were not using cheaper fpvs. Certainly in the earlier days there was a lot of footage of Ukranians dropping grenades and mortars via improvised drones and I think the Russians were more spotting with Orlans and then using artillery. Most if not all the random videos I've seen of cheaper FPV drones were Ukraninian but that could totally be my social media bubble.
ggm 2y ago
You would expect these are going to have anti-anti-drone defensive measures, lower profile signals, directional, IR/laser, wideband/agile-RF and the like, aside from things like shrouded blades, indirect message routing via a master drone to reduce RF energy cost.
- toss1 2y ago
  Yup. It's been 'Game On' for several years now. I would expect that using the RF signal for detection will go extinct as an opportunity in a very short time span (esp as targeting gets more AI-ish capabilities), detecting the audio signature will be key, and reducing that signature will accelerate.
  - ggm 2y ago
    Quieter drones would get my good housekeeping tick of approval. Lots of downsides but I think the upsides dominate. I prefer less intrusion (audio) to demanding they beep loudly so I know I am being snooped on.
    - toss1 2y ago
      Yup, nevermind reducing signature for military stealth, I'd also like it reduced just for general use. I think it will be critical for delivery applications. People think more rapid delivery via drone is cool, for about five seconds, when they think of the noise, and then it's "Hell no! I don't want those damn things buzzing around my neighborhood all day!"
WatchDog 2y ago
The press release talks mostly about sensors and software integration. It also mentions end-effector systems, Andruil's Anvil system[0], and Rheinmetall's "high-power guns", which I guess refers to Skynex[1]. The public demo videos[2] for Skynex aren't particularly impressive, they shoot down some high flying stationary drones. Skynex is a huge 35mm cannon, that seems expensive and overkill for the C-sUAS role. I'm surprised we aren't seeing smaller automated anti drone turrets, that can be deployed close to fighting positions, shooting either a small airburst grenade, like the 20mm round from the OICW program[3], or some kind of flak/shotgun round. [0]: https://www.anduril.com/hardware/anvil/ https://www.anduril.com/hardware/anvil/ [1]: https://www.rheinmetall.com/en/products/air-defence/air-defence-systems/networked-air-defence-skynex https://www.rheinmetall.com/en/products/air-defence/air-defe... [2]: https://youtu.be/2uL3dLFHZ_o?t=67 https://youtu.be/2uL3dLFHZ_o?t=67 [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_Individual_Combat_Weapon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_Individual_Combat_We...
- dralley 2y ago
  The electronics are the expensive part of the round (one would assume), and even moreso when you need to squeeze it into a smaller round. I doubt that having a slightly larger round (which also provides more range and might require less rounds to kill the target) is considered much of a problem.
  - TomatoCo 2y ago
    Basically, any impact with a drone will disable it. The trick is actually hitting it. So you either need volume of fire (which implies a buttload of small rounds), precision (which might imply lower mechanical or sensor reliability) or proximity detonation. If you're going for the latter and are optimizing for cost you don't (necessarily) want the smallest round possible.
  - WatchDog 2y ago
    The reason I'd like to see a smaller system, isn't primarily due to cost, but so that the system could be deployed closer to where it's needed, and in volume. The Skynex 35 mm cannon is massive, requires a truck to transport, and presumably needs a generator to power. If you could develop a small man-portable battery/solar powered turret, that fires small-arm caliber rounds, you could put them right next to a foxhole, to shoot down incoming drones. I don't think the electronics should be expensive(by military standards), they have already been developed, it's basically just a timed fuze, that is programed by the gun as it fires.
elfbargpt 2y ago
Hah, this reminded me that Dave Portnoy bought $500k of Rheinmetall stock about a month ago. He was copying the trade of a congresswoman who happens to be on the house subcommittee of military construction. Hard to imagine her trade wasn't related to this news https://x.com/stoolpresidente/status/1795810560677749078 https://x.com/stoolpresidente/status/1795810560677749078
- majormajor 2y ago
  That stock is slightly down over last month even with this press release 5 days ago, so the larger investment community seems less than sold on this news... One wonders if people on that committe would naturally be more inclined to trade in the defense industry; like how people on HN seem to have a lot of SV tech investments.
  - dralley 2y ago
    People tend to overestimate the profitability of defense contractors. Operating in a heavily boom-bust market, with high capital expenditures and high operating costs (the entire supply chain and final manufacturing is done almost exclusively in high cost-of-living western countries), and dealing with massive quantities of politics and regulation eats away at those margins. And Rheinmetall is in Europe, not America, where all of these things are 100x more true.
- sorenjan 2y ago
  Rheinmetall's stock value looks like it's down 6% in the last month, I doubt this news will do much to it. Her trade was probably related to Rheinmetall being one of the world's biggest weapons manufacturers and well positioned when Germany and other European countries are putting a lot of money into their military spending. Rheinmetall's stock's development during the last five years closely matches that of Saab, another big European weapons manufacturer. You don't have to be a political insider to guess that the stock will increase in value.
  - fsckboy 2y ago
    >You don't have to be a political insider to guess that the stock will increase in value. having non public information about a company that is also doing well publically is still an effective trading strategy. the value of a company like Rheinmetall is the sum of it's sources of profit.
ramesh31 2y ago
Imagine you hit the lottery at 25 and figured building autonomous death machines was a good way to live out your days. What a guy.
- yakshaving_jgt 2y ago
  Without death machines, how do you stop the russians? Tickle them?
- spookie 2y ago
  Yes, we live in an utopia and everyone is very kind and at peace. Who would ever want to build these things?
  - ramesh31 2y ago
    >"Yes, we live in an utopia and everyone is very kind and at peace. Who would ever want to build these things?" Killing and destruction is just about the easiest thing to do in the world. Animals can do it. Creation is what makes us human. And no, creating a sharper stick doesn't count.
    - mieses 2y ago
      you are defining an out-group (those who wage war and violence) and creating a justification for potential violence against them. comparing them to animals.. it's obvious where that's going. this is what humans do. sharp sticks are a pretty great innovation whether you use them for skewering lamb or killing bad guys.
ranger207 2y ago
Defense company product announcements don't mean anything till they get to the field. The only reason HN is interested in this one is because there's a Silicon Valley VC-funded company attached to it
Sabinus 2y ago
If they could get test units into Ukraine the development could be improved.
lwansbrough 2y ago
They mention using Skymaster for C&C but Lattice is also C&C. Idk anything about this stuff but it kinda sounds like WordPress doing a press release about integrating Drupal lol.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
antoniojtorres 2y ago
de

55 points by jdmark 2y ago

This is definitely interesting in the face of the news that Ukraine has been using very small FPV drones successfully on the front lines as opposed to more sophisticated systems like the Bayraktar drones. There seems to be a huge gap in air defense systems when it comes to small UAS and this should effectively address that.

klooney 2y ago
You have to get the costs balanced too- it can't cost 1 million dollars to kill a 250 dollar drone, for obvious "what if the adversary was China" reasons.
- jiggawatts 2y ago
  I don't understand why nobody has put auto-shotguns on an tripod with an aiming system, like a mini-CIWS. I've seen Russian soldiers successfully shoot down drones using shotguns, the problem is that the smaller ones can be too fast and nimble for humans to reliably target. Even if you can shoot down 2 of 3, the third one will get you. Combine the YOLO algorithm with a high-frame-rate camera, a two-axis servo, a heavy tripod, and a shotgun... and you're defended! This could be mounted on the back of a tank or humvee also.
  - Arrath 2y ago
    Something like you describe really does sound like an ideal terminal stage defense system, with 20 or 35mm autocannon covering longer ranges. Purely theory crafting, I think the final piece would be small, standalone AESA radar units perhaps the size of a man-carryable generator that can be distributed across a given area and networked to likewise distributed shooters, spreading out the targets, adding redundancy to the system, and reducing the odds of your dugout-with-air-defense-asset getting hit by an anti-radiation munition that homed in on a known emitter.
    - jiggawatts 2y ago
      The reason that you don't need radar for this is that the small suicide drones use cameras (vision) to attack. If you can't see them, they can't see you! Contrast this to general aviation where planes can be kilometers up, behind cloud-cover and can attack you with radar-guided missiles. Radar probably won't have high enough resolution and won't be able to differentiate between drones and birds. Not to mention that most drones are carbon fibre or plastic and won't have much of a radar return to begin with. Conversely, vision systems could be trained to ID drones reliably, and could use data such as the high-frequency "beat" of the propellers to detect drones from just a few pixels of sensor data.
  - nradov 2y ago
    Shotguns have a very limited effective range. Round pellets have a low ballistic coefficient and lose energy quickly. Using larger bore shotguns only delivers marginal range improvements. Automated shotguns might end up being one aspect of SHORAD, but based on recent developments it looks like they'll end up being less important than jammers plus autocannons (short term) and lasers (longer term).
  - YZF 2y ago
    I think many are trying something along these lines. The devil is in the details. The shotgun needs to be reloaded. The system needs to be reasonably reliable and durable. Feels like the range of the shotgun is also a problem. The system needs to have some sort of friend vs. foe identification, possibly not shoot at birds or other random objects. The camera needs to be able to deal with looking at the sun and low light, day and night, likely needs to be able to scan. Pretty soon you get to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS
    - Turing_Machine 2y ago
      > The shotgun needs to be reloaded. Eventually, certainly, but you can put it off for a while without much trouble. You can get 20 round drum magazines for 12 gauge shotguns, and keep hot-swapping 'em until your barrel overheats. > Phalanx_CIWS But that's 1980 technology. I bet a current GPU could outcompute it by orders of magnitude. Range is definitely an issue with shotguns. On the other hand, you're dealing with low-speed drones, not enemy missiles.
      - kiba 2y ago
        A Phalanx_CWIS is overkill. Also, I suspected that the system received continuous upgrades throughout the decades. Likewise, the Abrams tanks are cold war era tanks, but they are continuously upgraded that a modern Abrams tank isn't really a 1980 tank. Modernization is likely to remove some weight and make Abrams more survivable against drones, in response to the Russo-Ukrainian war;
      - YZF 2y ago
        My point was once you start adapting to all the requirements you inevitably end up with a more complex system. Another thing that happens in a war is that the enemy will adapt to what you're doing. The principles are fine (well, not sure camera is the right only sensor but aside). The actual engineering of a working system you can use in real life is complicated and that's what many are working on. Random similar discussion: https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/anti-drone-weapon-shotgun-turret.1168080/ https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/anti-drone-weapon-sh... I just came back from a walk and someone was flying a drone. Those things are fast, small, highly maneuverable.
nsguy 2y ago
Ukraine has been using improvised small FPV drones since Russia invaded pretty much. The Russians in contrast seem to have been using larger drones (like those supplied by Iran). Hezbollah has been attacking Israel from Lebanon for many months now with small drones and the air defence systems like Iron Dome haven't been able to effectively deal with that. One recent example: https://www.timesofisrael.com/hezbollah-swarms-north-with-attack-drones-another-uav-from-iraq-shot-down/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/hezbollah-swarms-north-with-at... There is a major effort right now in Israel to address that gap.
- dilyevsky 2y ago
  > The Russians in contrast seem to have been using larger drones (like those supplied by Iran). You are confusing short-range and long-range campaigns. Both sides are using fpvs, mavics-style, short-range fixed wing and long-range winged (like shahed-136) drones
  - nsguy 2y ago
    I thought the Russians relied more on military gas powered drones (like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlan-10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlan-10 ) and were not using cheaper fpvs. Certainly in the earlier days there was a lot of footage of Ukranians dropping grenades and mortars via improvised drones and I think the Russians were more spotting with Orlans and then using artillery. Most if not all the random videos I've seen of cheaper FPV drones were Ukraninian but that could totally be my social media bubble.

ggm 2y ago

You would expect these are going to have anti-anti-drone defensive measures, lower profile signals, directional, IR/laser, wideband/agile-RF and the like, aside from things like shrouded blades, indirect message routing via a master drone to reduce RF energy cost.

toss1 2y ago
Yup. It's been 'Game On' for several years now. I would expect that using the RF signal for detection will go extinct as an opportunity in a very short time span (esp as targeting gets more AI-ish capabilities), detecting the audio signature will be key, and reducing that signature will accelerate.
- ggm 2y ago
  Quieter drones would get my good housekeeping tick of approval. Lots of downsides but I think the upsides dominate. I prefer less intrusion (audio) to demanding they beep loudly so I know I am being snooped on.
  - toss1 2y ago
    Yup, nevermind reducing signature for military stealth, I'd also like it reduced just for general use. I think it will be critical for delivery applications. People think more rapid delivery via drone is cool, for about five seconds, when they think of the noise, and then it's "Hell no! I don't want those damn things buzzing around my neighborhood all day!"

WatchDog 2y ago

The press release talks mostly about sensors and software integration. It also mentions end-effector systems, Andruil's Anvil system[0], and Rheinmetall's "high-power guns", which I guess refers to Skynex[1]. The public demo videos[2] for Skynex aren't particularly impressive, they shoot down some high flying stationary drones. Skynex is a huge 35mm cannon, that seems expensive and overkill for the C-sUAS role. I'm surprised we aren't seeing smaller automated anti drone turrets, that can be deployed close to fighting positions, shooting either a small airburst grenade, like the 20mm round from the OICW program[3], or some kind of flak/shotgun round. [0]: https://www.anduril.com/hardware/anvil/ https://www.anduril.com/hardware/anvil/ [1]: https://www.rheinmetall.com/en/products/air-defence/air-defence-systems/networked-air-defence-skynex https://www.rheinmetall.com/en/products/air-defence/air-defe... [2]: https://youtu.be/2uL3dLFHZ_o?t=67 https://youtu.be/2uL3dLFHZ_o?t=67 [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_Individual_Combat_Weapon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_Individual_Combat_We...

dralley 2y ago
The electronics are the expensive part of the round (one would assume), and even moreso when you need to squeeze it into a smaller round. I doubt that having a slightly larger round (which also provides more range and might require less rounds to kill the target) is considered much of a problem.
- TomatoCo 2y ago
  Basically, any impact with a drone will disable it. The trick is actually hitting it. So you either need volume of fire (which implies a buttload of small rounds), precision (which might imply lower mechanical or sensor reliability) or proximity detonation. If you're going for the latter and are optimizing for cost you don't (necessarily) want the smallest round possible.
- WatchDog 2y ago
  The reason I'd like to see a smaller system, isn't primarily due to cost, but so that the system could be deployed closer to where it's needed, and in volume. The Skynex 35 mm cannon is massive, requires a truck to transport, and presumably needs a generator to power. If you could develop a small man-portable battery/solar powered turret, that fires small-arm caliber rounds, you could put them right next to a foxhole, to shoot down incoming drones. I don't think the electronics should be expensive(by military standards), they have already been developed, it's basically just a timed fuze, that is programed by the gun as it fires.

elfbargpt 2y ago

Hah, this reminded me that Dave Portnoy bought $500k of Rheinmetall stock about a month ago. He was copying the trade of a congresswoman who happens to be on the house subcommittee of military construction. Hard to imagine her trade wasn't related to this news https://x.com/stoolpresidente/status/1795810560677749078 https://x.com/stoolpresidente/status/1795810560677749078

majormajor 2y ago
That stock is slightly down over last month even with this press release 5 days ago, so the larger investment community seems less than sold on this news... One wonders if people on that committe would naturally be more inclined to trade in the defense industry; like how people on HN seem to have a lot of SV tech investments.
- dralley 2y ago
  People tend to overestimate the profitability of defense contractors. Operating in a heavily boom-bust market, with high capital expenditures and high operating costs (the entire supply chain and final manufacturing is done almost exclusively in high cost-of-living western countries), and dealing with massive quantities of politics and regulation eats away at those margins. And Rheinmetall is in Europe, not America, where all of these things are 100x more true.
sorenjan 2y ago
Rheinmetall's stock value looks like it's down 6% in the last month, I doubt this news will do much to it. Her trade was probably related to Rheinmetall being one of the world's biggest weapons manufacturers and well positioned when Germany and other European countries are putting a lot of money into their military spending. Rheinmetall's stock's development during the last five years closely matches that of Saab, another big European weapons manufacturer. You don't have to be a political insider to guess that the stock will increase in value.
- fsckboy 2y ago
  >You don't have to be a political insider to guess that the stock will increase in value. having non public information about a company that is also doing well publically is still an effective trading strategy. the value of a company like Rheinmetall is the sum of it's sources of profit.

ramesh31 2y ago

Imagine you hit the lottery at 25 and figured building autonomous death machines was a good way to live out your days. What a guy.

yakshaving_jgt 2y ago
Without death machines, how do you stop the russians? Tickle them?
spookie 2y ago
Yes, we live in an utopia and everyone is very kind and at peace. Who would ever want to build these things?
- ramesh31 2y ago
  >"Yes, we live in an utopia and everyone is very kind and at peace. Who would ever want to build these things?" Killing and destruction is just about the easiest thing to do in the world. Animals can do it. Creation is what makes us human. And no, creating a sharper stick doesn't count.
  - mieses 2y ago
    you are defining an out-group (those who wage war and violence) and creating a justification for potential violence against them. comparing them to animals.. it's obvious where that's going. this is what humans do. sharp sticks are a pretty great innovation whether you use them for skewering lamb or killing bad guys.

ranger207 2y ago

Defense company product announcements don't mean anything till they get to the field. The only reason HN is interested in this one is because there's a Silicon Valley VC-funded company attached to it

Sabinus 2y ago

If they could get test units into Ukraine the development could be improved.

lwansbrough 2y ago

They mention using Skymaster for C&C but Lattice is also C&C. Idk anything about this stuff but it kinda sounds like WordPress doing a press release about integrating Drupal lol.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

antoniojtorres 2y ago