4 ms·

How exactly do drones project power globally?

by cosmicgadget 7mo ago

jacquesm 7mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb
- dmitrygr 7mo ago
  >> How exactly do drones project power globally? > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb "The next country over" != Worldwide
  - jacquesm 7mo ago
    You could do this anywhere in the world for a very small amount of money. The implications of the Ukrainian war have changed the balance of power for ever. No airport will ever be safe again.
    - dmitrygr 7mo ago
      sneaking weapons into some countries is harder than into others, making things that fly long distances gets exponentially harder as distance goes up linearly.
      - jacquesm 7mo ago
        That's true, but when things get cheaper you can afford to lose a lot of them. Suddenly every container vessel is suspect. That trick has a lot of potential and harbors are relatively soft targets and easily accessible from just outside international waters. You could do a shitload of damage to most countries by just targeting a few key locations well within the reach of a basic drone and what sub $1000 drones can do is changing by the day. Armor and artillery are basically useless against a fleet of seaborne drones.
        chasd00 7mo ago
        you don't have to do a lot of damage to have a dramatic effect either. Imagine an airport near the coast, you don't have to destroy the airport but if one drone flattens the tires on one out of ever 50 planes on a runway the airport might as well be a smoldering crater. It's like a ddos attack and similar to what's happening in Iran today. All it takes is one drone to hit one tanker and a > 0% of it happening again and no one is sailing because their payload is uninsurable. In the same way, all it takes is one drone to disable one airliner and a credible threat it could happen again and no plane is taking off from that airport ever again.
- cosmicgadget 7mo ago
  Clandestine power projection. Neat!
  - jacquesm 7mo ago
    Somewhere in the next decade we'll wake up to a large military base, port or airport utterly wrecked by some party spending << $100k.
    - XorNot 7mo ago
      Operation Spiderweb was not a power projection exercise though, it was an espionage mission. This is like arguing you don't need a military because you'll just have 1 spy turn the enemies own weapons on them. Sure...its not that it can't work, but there's more then a few issues with the strategic plan.
      - jacquesm 7mo ago
        Fair, it's not an aircraft carrier. But you can turn any container vessel into a cheap rough equivalent. Take the coastline, then maybe 30 km inland and see what installations you could reach. Pearl Harbor on a shoestring budget is a realistic threat now.
        cosmicgadget 7mo ago
        Would you mind listing the major functions of a carrier group and explain why a container ship full of drones is a "rough equivalent".
        jacquesm 7mo ago
        Keeping the strait of Hormuz open would be one of those functions, wouldn't it? Oh, wait... Seriously, your question is borderline trolling, you know exactly which functions of a carrier group are and are not matched by drones flown from containers. The point is, in case it wasn't clear, that you can do a ton of destruction without necessarily opening yourself up to a counter attack, precisely the kind of advantage that parties that put carrier groups in distance places to project power tend to be looking for. The ability to destroy lots of stuff in a relatively short time without losing a lot of personnel or exposing yourself. And that capability is now to a large extent available to states that before would not have been able to do meaningful damage to coastal cities and coastal infrastructure (think refineries and large scale shipping ports). And you can't even be sure that whoever operates the vessel is in on it. It's not going to help you to stop China from invading Taiwan if they decide to. But it could put a very large dent in the economic capability of any country or bloc that came under a concerted attack. Also note that 'drone' is a pretty wide label that crosses over into what previously was territory reserved for cruise missiles and ICBMs for air power and on the water there are many developments as well. So if you have to hide your carrier group at stand-off distance for fear of seeing it sunk then it is not all that different from that container full of drones. You can destroy stuff, and that's about it. And long term that just makes more enemies, it doesn't really solve anything.
John23832 7mo ago
If I you can project power globally , but as soon as a human is put on the ground they're disintegrated by a 100 dollar drone, how important was your ability to get there?

How exactly do drones project power globally?

jacquesm 7mo ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb

dmitrygr 7mo ago
>> How exactly do drones project power globally? > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spiderweb "The next country over" != Worldwide
- jacquesm 7mo ago
  You could do this anywhere in the world for a very small amount of money. The implications of the Ukrainian war have changed the balance of power for ever. No airport will ever be safe again.
  - dmitrygr 7mo ago
    sneaking weapons into some countries is harder than into others, making things that fly long distances gets exponentially harder as distance goes up linearly.
    - jacquesm 7mo ago
      That's true, but when things get cheaper you can afford to lose a lot of them. Suddenly every container vessel is suspect. That trick has a lot of potential and harbors are relatively soft targets and easily accessible from just outside international waters. You could do a shitload of damage to most countries by just targeting a few key locations well within the reach of a basic drone and what sub $1000 drones can do is changing by the day. Armor and artillery are basically useless against a fleet of seaborne drones.
      - chasd00 7mo ago
        you don't have to do a lot of damage to have a dramatic effect either. Imagine an airport near the coast, you don't have to destroy the airport but if one drone flattens the tires on one out of ever 50 planes on a runway the airport might as well be a smoldering crater. It's like a ddos attack and similar to what's happening in Iran today. All it takes is one drone to hit one tanker and a > 0% of it happening again and no one is sailing because their payload is uninsurable. In the same way, all it takes is one drone to disable one airliner and a credible threat it could happen again and no plane is taking off from that airport ever again.
cosmicgadget 7mo ago
Clandestine power projection. Neat!
- jacquesm 7mo ago
  Somewhere in the next decade we'll wake up to a large military base, port or airport utterly wrecked by some party spending << $100k.
  - XorNot 7mo ago
    Operation Spiderweb was not a power projection exercise though, it was an espionage mission. This is like arguing you don't need a military because you'll just have 1 spy turn the enemies own weapons on them. Sure...its not that it can't work, but there's more then a few issues with the strategic plan.
    - jacquesm 7mo ago
      Fair, it's not an aircraft carrier. But you can turn any container vessel into a cheap rough equivalent. Take the coastline, then maybe 30 km inland and see what installations you could reach. Pearl Harbor on a shoestring budget is a realistic threat now.
      - cosmicgadget 7mo ago
        Would you mind listing the major functions of a carrier group and explain why a container ship full of drones is a "rough equivalent".
        jacquesm 7mo ago
        Keeping the strait of Hormuz open would be one of those functions, wouldn't it? Oh, wait... Seriously, your question is borderline trolling, you know exactly which functions of a carrier group are and are not matched by drones flown from containers. The point is, in case it wasn't clear, that you can do a ton of destruction without necessarily opening yourself up to a counter attack, precisely the kind of advantage that parties that put carrier groups in distance places to project power tend to be looking for. The ability to destroy lots of stuff in a relatively short time without losing a lot of personnel or exposing yourself. And that capability is now to a large extent available to states that before would not have been able to do meaningful damage to coastal cities and coastal infrastructure (think refineries and large scale shipping ports). And you can't even be sure that whoever operates the vessel is in on it. It's not going to help you to stop China from invading Taiwan if they decide to. But it could put a very large dent in the economic capability of any country or bloc that came under a concerted attack. Also note that 'drone' is a pretty wide label that crosses over into what previously was territory reserved for cruise missiles and ICBMs for air power and on the water there are many developments as well. So if you have to hide your carrier group at stand-off distance for fear of seeing it sunk then it is not all that different from that container full of drones. You can destroy stuff, and that's about it. And long term that just makes more enemies, it doesn't really solve anything.

John23832 7mo ago

If I you can project power globally , but as soon as a human is put on the ground they're disintegrated by a 100 dollar drone, how important was your ability to get there?