5 ms·

Agreed, cost is what would drive using drones instead of high performance fighter aircraft. I am not suggesting that you build unmanned F-15s for the $4mm each

Agreed, cost is what would drive using drones instead of high performance fighter aircraft. I am not suggesting that you build unmanned F-15s for the $4mm each that you can build a Predator for. That's patently ludicrous I agree with you! So no fancy engines, nor fancy avionics. Also don't bother with swarm AI, have people on the ground handling targeting. Don't develop a billion dollar solution when $50k/year (roughly) works just fine. What I was suggesting is that you build a bunch of aerial SAM launchers. Take a Predator, put something that can receive targeting info on it, arm it with air to air missiles. Deploy many of these in the sky. Then for every 10 missile mules, you put up a single command and control Predator. It has the fancy equipment to ensure that you can actually do targeting. Then put a transmitter on all Predators which can be turned on such that you can't detect which Predator is the command and control one. Let's suppose that you could create this fleet of 11 for $4mm * 11 + $2mm * 10 + $20mm * 1 = $84mm This is very conservative in my mind because at this point we're basically paying US prices for the gear. Again, we're not going for the fanciest, best, most high performance stuff ever built. Use old designs, don't worry about the best survivability, don't make them too rugged and thus don't drive up the cost. We're going for The Innovator's Dilemma style worse-is-better so long as it's functional enough to mule up the ordinance. You can now afford at least 2x of these 11 unit Predator swarms for every 1x F-35 that can be deployed. An F-35 only carries 10 air to air weapons and that's when loaded with nothing but. The odds they get both command and control Predators on every engagement is statistically slim provided you're talking about at least a few dozen engagements. That means that just playing a numbers game you're going to shoot down the F-35s and because you've got so many damn drones in the air enjoy quite a bit of air superiority. It's not exceedingly difficult to imagine that if the sky was thick with these things that the F-35s might not get all their ordinance away before being shot at making the grinding more painful. Could the US manage such a feat of engineering discipline and fast-track development? NOT A CHANCE!! If you're thinking that this is unrealistic based on how things work in the US you're 100% correct. But to suppose that no other industrialized country in the world could embark on such a venture and succeed? If you believe that please stop reading HN because startups could never work/win against the entrenched giants who have all the advantages.

greedo 12y ago
It's not a matter of startups, or entrenched giants or any such thing, or the Innovator's Dilemma. It's a matter of communications, cost and performance. A Predator can't fly as high as an F-35 or F-22. It can't maneuver nearly as well either. Can't fly as fast. It can't be refueled in flight, so it's range is lower than the F-35. So you'd have to hope that the missile it carried could compensate for these deficiencies. However, missiles are very finicky, and have launch parameters that help them improve their odds. The military looks at it in terms of PoK (probability of kill). So to be cheap (so you can afford to have swarms) you have to give up performance. This will affect PoK. Next you have to have robust, un-jammable commlinks. So far, no one has those. That's going to be expensive to develop. Humans can make decisions when the comms are degraded, or non-existent. AI has a long ways to go, and AI is expensive. To remain cheap, you'll have to give that up. With you napkin/elevator calculations, you would be trading 22 Predators for each F-35. 22 Predators is $88M, and the F-35 will eventually drop close to $100m as it reaches IOC. Still, not a bad bargain if it works. But now, since you've gone cheap and off the shelf, you've got a slow, unmaneuverable aircraft that can't detect a target (no radar), can't communicate well with it's controllers, and can't climb very high, limiting the range of its missiles. Then, even if you outfit this Predator swarm with an UberMissile, you'll have blown your cost equation out of the water when this swarm comes up against SAMs, or a squadron of F-16s. The swarm won't even see the F-35s due to frontal aspect stealth, and they'll be able to target the Predators and kill them like baby seals. They'll be able to engage, kill, and disengage before the low performance Predators will be able to react.
- RogerL 12y ago
  I want to write to back you up on this. I've spent most of (not all of) my career in military avionics and aerospace. And this was at small companies. The big companies win the big contracts, but so much is contracted out, and there are plenty of other options. But I digress... This is a really hard, multi-dimensional optimization problem. The engineers at Lockheed Martin, Rockwell, etc., are not dumb. They are the opposite of dumb. They are rocket scientists, in both the colloquial and literal sense. The same holds true for us at the smaller companies. Heavy STEM educations, a lifetime of engineering and research. I've done a lot of work on next-gen battlefield stuff. It's not easy. It's not. It's control theory, filter theory, AI, computer vision, RF design, and so much more. If you can't play in at least 3-4 of those fields at a pretty high level you aren't invited to the party. I've seen far more professional, intelligent, and pragmatic engineers in that work than what I've seen pass for engineering in Silicon Valley. You really aren't going to sit in an armchair and design up a system that'll work. OTOH, if you make something that does work, the military will beat a path to your door. Look into SBIRs, for example. I've worked on a lot of them. The door is not closed. The door is closed to half-baked schemes, but if you have an idea for putting some low cost hardware and software together, you can do something with it. I'm being more than a bit facile here; it isn't so hard to get through a Phase I and Phase II SBIR; getting your system deployed is quite a bit harder. Still, there are options. Just be prepared for the fact that they are going to take your product, stick it in a field, and shoot (literal) bullets at it. Ohh, failed the projectile test.... Yes, I take the point about swarms, but war is an extremely hostile environment (no pun intended). And as soon as you have tipped the equation towards "disposable", expect the enemy to change their systems to help you 'dispose' of them as soon as possible. Maybe your drone can operate in the theater today; what about 10 years from now? I honestly don't know, the calculus is anything but clear to me.

greedo 12y ago

It's not a matter of startups, or entrenched giants or any such thing, or the Innovator's Dilemma. It's a matter of communications, cost and performance. A Predator can't fly as high as an F-35 or F-22. It can't maneuver nearly as well either. Can't fly as fast. It can't be refueled in flight, so it's range is lower than the F-35. So you'd have to hope that the missile it carried could compensate for these deficiencies. However, missiles are very finicky, and have launch parameters that help them improve their odds. The military looks at it in terms of PoK (probability of kill). So to be cheap (so you can afford to have swarms) you have to give up performance. This will affect PoK. Next you have to have robust, un-jammable commlinks. So far, no one has those. That's going to be expensive to develop. Humans can make decisions when the comms are degraded, or non-existent. AI has a long ways to go, and AI is expensive. To remain cheap, you'll have to give that up. With you napkin/elevator calculations, you would be trading 22 Predators for each F-35. 22 Predators is $88M, and the F-35 will eventually drop close to $100m as it reaches IOC. Still, not a bad bargain if it works. But now, since you've gone cheap and off the shelf, you've got a slow, unmaneuverable aircraft that can't detect a target (no radar), can't communicate well with it's controllers, and can't climb very high, limiting the range of its missiles. Then, even if you outfit this Predator swarm with an UberMissile, you'll have blown your cost equation out of the water when this swarm comes up against SAMs, or a squadron of F-16s. The swarm won't even see the F-35s due to frontal aspect stealth, and they'll be able to target the Predators and kill them like baby seals. They'll be able to engage, kill, and disengage before the low performance Predators will be able to react.

RogerL 12y ago
I want to write to back you up on this. I've spent most of (not all of) my career in military avionics and aerospace. And this was at small companies. The big companies win the big contracts, but so much is contracted out, and there are plenty of other options. But I digress... This is a really hard, multi-dimensional optimization problem. The engineers at Lockheed Martin, Rockwell, etc., are not dumb. They are the opposite of dumb. They are rocket scientists, in both the colloquial and literal sense. The same holds true for us at the smaller companies. Heavy STEM educations, a lifetime of engineering and research. I've done a lot of work on next-gen battlefield stuff. It's not easy. It's not. It's control theory, filter theory, AI, computer vision, RF design, and so much more. If you can't play in at least 3-4 of those fields at a pretty high level you aren't invited to the party. I've seen far more professional, intelligent, and pragmatic engineers in that work than what I've seen pass for engineering in Silicon Valley. You really aren't going to sit in an armchair and design up a system that'll work. OTOH, if you make something that does work, the military will beat a path to your door. Look into SBIRs, for example. I've worked on a lot of them. The door is not closed. The door is closed to half-baked schemes, but if you have an idea for putting some low cost hardware and software together, you can do something with it. I'm being more than a bit facile here; it isn't so hard to get through a Phase I and Phase II SBIR; getting your system deployed is quite a bit harder. Still, there are options. Just be prepared for the fact that they are going to take your product, stick it in a field, and shoot (literal) bullets at it. Ohh, failed the projectile test.... Yes, I take the point about swarms, but war is an extremely hostile environment (no pun intended). And as soon as you have tipped the equation towards "disposable", expect the enemy to change their systems to help you 'dispose' of them as soon as possible. Maybe your drone can operate in the theater today; what about 10 years from now? I honestly don't know, the calculus is anything but clear to me.