5 ms·

Shooting down $40k drones with $4mil interceptors is a problem. Hoping at some point this wake up call is heard. One recent update is that Apache Attack helico

Shooting down $40k drones with $4mil interceptors is a problem. Hoping at some point this wake up call is heard. One recent update is that Apache Attack helicopters are being refitted to hunt/kill these types of drones, but the newest Iranian models are flying 300+ mph which is faster than a single rotor helicopter can fly (the leading blade of a helicopter starts to break the sound barrier).

infecto 8mo ago
Surprising there are not more solutions here. We have seen these style of drones for a number of years. I guess it’s a hard problem in general but I also wonder if part of it is simply the historically entrenched defense industry.
- bigyabai 8mo ago
  Part of it has to be owed to how tactically potent drone swarms are, as a means of asymmetric conflict. Even the best layered defensed are limited by magazine depth, whereas attack drones can be sent in theoretically unlimited waves. In practice, this was seemingly validated by the 2002 Millennium Challenge controversy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002#Exercise_action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002#Exer...
  - tim-tday 8mo ago
    Ukraine has a pretty good track record of taking down drone waves. US had plenty of warning of this tactic and years of examples of successful defense. I’m surprised we’re not seeing footage of thousands of loitering drone killers waiting for a target. Maybe the us just can’t do low cost high volume anything in the military.
- jltsiren 8mo ago
  The solutions already exist and have been proven on the battlefield. Peacetime military forces are just slow to adapt, as there are no real incentives to adapt quickly. Drones such as the Shahed are little more than cheap mediocre cruise missiles. Because they are cheap, the enemy can launch them in large numbers. You counter them by detecting them early and then using plenty of cheap mediocre anti-aircraft weapons. Mostly guns and interceptor drones (=cheap mediocre anti-aircraft missiles).
- tehlike 8mo ago
  Microwave/directed energy fixes this.
marcosdumay 8mo ago
The way things are going, no, let's hope the US never wakes up for this problem.
Bender 8mo ago
Israel, United States, United Kingdom, China and Russia have HEL high-energy lasers that can shoot down fast drones. Several other countries are working on HEL development. The numbers of operational HEL systems are still very small but growing. I believe that Israel have the most of them in operation today developed primarily by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems. 10kw to 50kw on trucks, 100kw ground based. Range: 7-10km, shorter in fog or rain. Dwell time: 4 to 5 seconds. Cost per shot: $2–$3.50. Targets: UAVs/drones (including swarms), short-range rockets (Qassam-style), mortars, artillery shells, cruise missiles, and potentially other low/slow-flying threats. It excels against cheap, high-volume threats where kinetic interceptors are uneconomical. The US is working on a megawatt version that will be mounted on ships to take down full sized aircraft, hyper-sonic weapons and ballistic missiles. Timeline: 2030. Even at 30-50 kW (e.g., the earlier AN/SEQ-3 LaWS on USS Ponce), lasers can target helicopters or manned aircraft to cause crashes by frying sensors or engines. Scaling to hundreds of kW extends range and lethality against faster, larger aircraft.
- 0_____0 8mo ago
  Cost per shot including the development and unit costs amortized over the service life of the weapons system? Or is that just the cost of the energy that got pumped into the laser?
  - Bender 8mo ago
    That cost per shot is just the energy utilized by the C2 targeting and laser system. I have no idea what the overall cost of the system is. I have not yet found it published. I would wager the overall system is rather expensive but worth it to the point of using expensive ballistics to neutralize a 40k drone which is at risk of being overwhelmed. I also can't find the accurate time to target stats, just overall dwell time.
  - Markoff 8mo ago
    Is the cost per shot even relevant if you don't include value of the saved property?
icegreentea2 8mo ago
US forces have been answering the wake up call for the last few years. The main weapon that Apache's use to hunt drones are laser guided rockets (APKWS) with a per-shot cost around $30k (https://www.airandspaceforces.com/apkws-base-laser-guided-rockets-pentagon-contract/ https://www.airandspaceforces.com/apkws-base-laser-guided-ro...) These weapons have been fitted to most US tactical fighters for the counter drone role as well. APKWS is also not a "new" weapon system - it started fielding back to 2012, and was adapted into the counter drone role. There are other lower cost (compared to legacy systems designed to take on manned aircraft) solutions currently deployed. The US Army has the Coyote, which is in the ~100k range. Beyond cost of munitions, you have to consider that cheaper systems are going to have less range, and therefore you'll need more launchers, and you can start running up costs that way.
computerthings 8mo ago
[dead]
tim333 8mo ago
The Ukrainians have a lot of experience taking these things down with interceptor drones and similar like he sting which is about $2100 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sting_(drone) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sting_(drone) It's an arms race with each side constantly updating the tech. The Ukrainians have offered to help out in the Gulf but for some reason Trump is kind of dismissive. There's a new UK/UKR one called Octopus coming shortly https://united24media.com/latest-news/ukraine-and-uk-successfully-test-octopus-interceptor-drones-for-air-defense-15100 https://united24media.com/latest-news/ukraine-and-uk-success...
tim-tday 8mo ago
Ukraine added a mini gun to a previously unarmed airplane to good effect.

infecto 8mo ago

Surprising there are not more solutions here. We have seen these style of drones for a number of years. I guess it’s a hard problem in general but I also wonder if part of it is simply the historically entrenched defense industry.

bigyabai 8mo ago
Part of it has to be owed to how tactically potent drone swarms are, as a means of asymmetric conflict. Even the best layered defensed are limited by magazine depth, whereas attack drones can be sent in theoretically unlimited waves. In practice, this was seemingly validated by the 2002 Millennium Challenge controversy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002#Exercise_action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002#Exer...
- tim-tday 8mo ago
  Ukraine has a pretty good track record of taking down drone waves. US had plenty of warning of this tactic and years of examples of successful defense. I’m surprised we’re not seeing footage of thousands of loitering drone killers waiting for a target. Maybe the us just can’t do low cost high volume anything in the military.
jltsiren 8mo ago
The solutions already exist and have been proven on the battlefield. Peacetime military forces are just slow to adapt, as there are no real incentives to adapt quickly. Drones such as the Shahed are little more than cheap mediocre cruise missiles. Because they are cheap, the enemy can launch them in large numbers. You counter them by detecting them early and then using plenty of cheap mediocre anti-aircraft weapons. Mostly guns and interceptor drones (=cheap mediocre anti-aircraft missiles).
tehlike 8mo ago
Microwave/directed energy fixes this.

marcosdumay 8mo ago

The way things are going, no, let's hope the US never wakes up for this problem.

Bender 8mo ago

Israel, United States, United Kingdom, China and Russia have HEL high-energy lasers that can shoot down fast drones. Several other countries are working on HEL development. The numbers of operational HEL systems are still very small but growing. I believe that Israel have the most of them in operation today developed primarily by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems. 10kw to 50kw on trucks, 100kw ground based. Range: 7-10km, shorter in fog or rain. Dwell time: 4 to 5 seconds. Cost per shot: $2–$3.50. Targets: UAVs/drones (including swarms), short-range rockets (Qassam-style), mortars, artillery shells, cruise missiles, and potentially other low/slow-flying threats. It excels against cheap, high-volume threats where kinetic interceptors are uneconomical. The US is working on a megawatt version that will be mounted on ships to take down full sized aircraft, hyper-sonic weapons and ballistic missiles. Timeline: 2030. Even at 30-50 kW (e.g., the earlier AN/SEQ-3 LaWS on USS Ponce), lasers can target helicopters or manned aircraft to cause crashes by frying sensors or engines. Scaling to hundreds of kW extends range and lethality against faster, larger aircraft.

0_____0 8mo ago
Cost per shot including the development and unit costs amortized over the service life of the weapons system? Or is that just the cost of the energy that got pumped into the laser?
- Bender 8mo ago
  That cost per shot is just the energy utilized by the C2 targeting and laser system. I have no idea what the overall cost of the system is. I have not yet found it published. I would wager the overall system is rather expensive but worth it to the point of using expensive ballistics to neutralize a 40k drone which is at risk of being overwhelmed. I also can't find the accurate time to target stats, just overall dwell time.
- Markoff 8mo ago
  Is the cost per shot even relevant if you don't include value of the saved property?

icegreentea2 8mo ago

US forces have been answering the wake up call for the last few years. The main weapon that Apache's use to hunt drones are laser guided rockets (APKWS) with a per-shot cost around $30k (https://www.airandspaceforces.com/apkws-base-laser-guided-rockets-pentagon-contract/ https://www.airandspaceforces.com/apkws-base-laser-guided-ro...) These weapons have been fitted to most US tactical fighters for the counter drone role as well. APKWS is also not a "new" weapon system - it started fielding back to 2012, and was adapted into the counter drone role. There are other lower cost (compared to legacy systems designed to take on manned aircraft) solutions currently deployed. The US Army has the Coyote, which is in the ~100k range. Beyond cost of munitions, you have to consider that cheaper systems are going to have less range, and therefore you'll need more launchers, and you can start running up costs that way.

computerthings 8mo ago

[dead]

tim333 8mo ago

The Ukrainians have a lot of experience taking these things down with interceptor drones and similar like he sting which is about $2100 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sting_(drone) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sting_(drone) It's an arms race with each side constantly updating the tech. The Ukrainians have offered to help out in the Gulf but for some reason Trump is kind of dismissive. There's a new UK/UKR one called Octopus coming shortly https://united24media.com/latest-news/ukraine-and-uk-successfully-test-octopus-interceptor-drones-for-air-defense-15100 https://united24media.com/latest-news/ukraine-and-uk-success...

tim-tday 8mo ago

Ukraine added a mini gun to a previously unarmed airplane to good effect.