6 ms·

Did you miss the part about signals jamming in the article? The reason the attack on airfields worked is precisely because they operate inland and not on the fr

Did you miss the part about signals jamming in the article? The reason the attack on airfields worked is precisely because they operate inland and not on the frontline. Cellular networks not only can be jammed but towers are a priority target. That’s why Starlink is/was so crucial. Even GPS is jammed so independent flight can be impossible with cheap components. The thermite drones do attack forested areas on the farmlands, but the forests I talk about are tens or hundreds of kilometers wide. You could just fire an artillery round and be done with it.

general1726 1y ago
Since fiber optics being used signal jamming is stopping to be a thing. You can fly with a drone into basement and have 4k video.
fellowniusmonk 1y ago
I wonder what the tech gap is to using circular polarized light from the sun as a point of reference for dead reckoning. If Bees use it why not camera systems?
- LorenPechtel 1y ago
  That will give facing. Not range, nor actual bearing (your drone is moving relative to the local air, not to the ground.)
  - fellowniusmonk 1y ago
    I guess I mean in the sense of if you have the drones starting position, the end location (or approximate) and movement tracking based on terrain movement, like the cheap version of Tomahawk but instead of having a map you just use relative change from a stereo camera/lidar pointed at the ground to track relative movement? I guess the hardware to run that isn't available in mass production.
    - LorenPechtel 1y ago
      I don't think you can do terrain following entirely in software unless you already have an accurate image of what to expect--and a munition will never know the fine detail. (Coarse detail--I would expect you could do a fair job of steering a ballistic missile based on images of the target area. Closest match and figure out in what way the image is stretched is at least theoretically possible with camera + software. Computationally practical, I don't know, nor how accurate it could be.)
dinfinity 1y ago
> Did you miss the part about signals jamming in the article? "Drones also operate in a cluttered segment of the electromagnetic spectrum. First-person view drones use unencrypted analog radio signals, and in hot parts of the front, as many as a dozen drone teams may be competing for use of a handful of frequencies (a consequence of using cheaper components)." The currently used FPV drones use consumer level ass communication methods. Do you also think that current military-grade communication methods can be easily jammed on the battlefield? Using the consumer level stuff as a reference point and thinking it is somehow SOTA is not going to lead to good conclusions. > Cellular networks not only can be jammed but towers are a priority target. The point was that there are plenty of radio signals that work fine and with high bandwidth in the 'problematic' terrain types you mentioned. Having said that, you can't rely on the cellular towers of the enemies of course. You need relay drones to create your own ad hoc cellular network. > You could just fire an artillery round and be done with it. At what coordinate? The whole point of FPV drones is that the operator can fly close to the target area and only then decide what the best place to strike is. A shell that is 20m off target is just a waste. The point of destroying the canopy is reducing the attenuation of the signal for other drones to go in and be able to be precise.
- CamperBob2 1y ago
  Dense forest scenarios aside, it seems to me that an FPV drone could perhaps serve best as an adjunct to mortar fire and other artillery, rather than as a replacement. If you knew exactly where your drone was, it could basically assume the role of a forward observer. The article says that GPS is largely hopeless on their particular battlefield, though, so some other means of accurate positioning would probably be needed.

general1726 1y ago

Since fiber optics being used signal jamming is stopping to be a thing. You can fly with a drone into basement and have 4k video.

fellowniusmonk 1y ago

I wonder what the tech gap is to using circular polarized light from the sun as a point of reference for dead reckoning. If Bees use it why not camera systems?

LorenPechtel 1y ago
That will give facing. Not range, nor actual bearing (your drone is moving relative to the local air, not to the ground.)
- fellowniusmonk 1y ago
  I guess I mean in the sense of if you have the drones starting position, the end location (or approximate) and movement tracking based on terrain movement, like the cheap version of Tomahawk but instead of having a map you just use relative change from a stereo camera/lidar pointed at the ground to track relative movement? I guess the hardware to run that isn't available in mass production.
  - LorenPechtel 1y ago
    I don't think you can do terrain following entirely in software unless you already have an accurate image of what to expect--and a munition will never know the fine detail. (Coarse detail--I would expect you could do a fair job of steering a ballistic missile based on images of the target area. Closest match and figure out in what way the image is stretched is at least theoretically possible with camera + software. Computationally practical, I don't know, nor how accurate it could be.)

dinfinity 1y ago

> Did you miss the part about signals jamming in the article? "Drones also operate in a cluttered segment of the electromagnetic spectrum. First-person view drones use unencrypted analog radio signals, and in hot parts of the front, as many as a dozen drone teams may be competing for use of a handful of frequencies (a consequence of using cheaper components)." The currently used FPV drones use consumer level ass communication methods. Do you also think that current military-grade communication methods can be easily jammed on the battlefield? Using the consumer level stuff as a reference point and thinking it is somehow SOTA is not going to lead to good conclusions. > Cellular networks not only can be jammed but towers are a priority target. The point was that there are plenty of radio signals that work fine and with high bandwidth in the 'problematic' terrain types you mentioned. Having said that, you can't rely on the cellular towers of the enemies of course. You need relay drones to create your own ad hoc cellular network. > You could just fire an artillery round and be done with it. At what coordinate? The whole point of FPV drones is that the operator can fly close to the target area and only then decide what the best place to strike is. A shell that is 20m off target is just a waste. The point of destroying the canopy is reducing the attenuation of the signal for other drones to go in and be able to be precise.

CamperBob2 1y ago
Dense forest scenarios aside, it seems to me that an FPV drone could perhaps serve best as an adjunct to mortar fire and other artillery, rather than as a replacement. If you knew exactly where your drone was, it could basically assume the role of a forward observer. The article says that GPS is largely hopeless on their particular battlefield, though, so some other means of accurate positioning would probably be needed.