4 ms·
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
by 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 agoBasically, 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 agoThe 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.