Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

The Eagles Message Board

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Featured Replies

1 minute ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Unlike what's depicted in the movies, lasers (even mil spec) aren't instantaneous vaporizers. They need still need to linger on the target. And as mentioned, size of the energy source is a concern also, which limit options on anything but larger naval platforms.

What we've seen in Ukraine aren't technically coordinated drone swarms though. They are individual low-tech drones that dive bomb on stationary unarmored targets. I don't think there's much concern there to be honest. But an actual swarm would require something akin to bird shot on steroids. Maybe something proximity fused but their rcs and heat sigs would be very low and you wouldn't want to be launching anything that's more expensive than the target you're striking.

The concern is more so China than Russia in my opinion, which is the pivot our entire military is making. They have the industrial capacity and technical ability for "drone swarms” which are coordinated, sophisticated and effective against high value targets like military bases, naval ships, etc.

As far as the bold part, disagree. I would spend $1 million to take out a $1,000 weapon which could destroy a $1 billion asset, for example. The cost/reward needs to take into account the value of what you are protecting, not just the value of the defensive weapon expended.

  • Replies 25.6k
  • Views 652.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • This will end the war:  

  • Here's the truly hysterical part -- the current situation is ideal for the US. Russia's military is engaged and has been seriously degraded to the point that they have to bring in foreign troops. We a

  • Yes, not only do I not rely on the western media, I came to Ukraine to see for myself that there are no NSDAPs or neo NSDAPs. Nor are there stacks of violence anywhere there isn't Russian troops. Nor

Posted Images

1 minute ago, TEW said:

The concern is more so China than Russia in my opinion, which is the pivot our entire military is making. They have the industrial capacity and technical ability for "drone swarms” which are coordinated, sophisticated and effective against high value targets like military bases, naval ships, etc.

What ??  Russia has a bunch of 50+ year old's who don't even want to fight.  That doesn't scare you ??

25 minutes ago, TEW said:

The concern is more so China than Russia in my opinion, which is the pivot our entire military is making. They have the industrial capacity and technical ability for "drone swarms” which are coordinated, sophisticated and effective against high value targets like military bases, naval ships, etc.

As far as the bold part, disagree. I would spend $1 million to take out a $1,000 weapon which could destroy a $1 billion asset, for example. The cost/reward needs to take into account the value of what you are protecting, not just the value of the defensive weapon expended.

True, it depends on what exactly is vulnerable to drone attacks, but generally speaking, you don't want to put yourself in the position of firing million dollar missiles to take out thousand dollar drones at scale. Basically, we need a cheaper version of the iron dome.

59 minutes ago, TEW said:

As I understand it, the new RAM materials being used on the B-21 (and NGAD in the future) are supposed to cut down on maintenance by a lot. Basically the new ceramics are a small step up in radar absorption but a huge improvement in heat resistance, anti corrosion, etc which should cut down on maintenance cycles significantly. So more airframes with a faster turnaround that are cheaper to maintain. Here’s hoping!

The drone swarm problem is a real quandary. I have no idea if there is a defensive counter that’s economical. Lasers, I guess, but then you’re so dependent on a reliable energy source. And even then how expensive would getting enough lasers to defend against a drone swarm be?

Rather than attacking the drone is there means to jam it’s communication or guidance system? The idea of exchanging stingers/ other ordinance for lower tech doesn’t seem sustainable industrially (although better than losing soldiers).

It's not mounted on a shark, but...  LINK

Yeah that's another issue with lasers, you basically need perfect conditions for firing. Rain, fog, snow, even high levels of humidity make it a no-go.

2 minutes ago, Mlodj said:

It's not mounted on a shark, but...  LINK

15s to kill a drone - usually the problem with lasers is that they need a lot of energy. I wonder what the rate of fire / battery capacity is…

3 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Yeah that's another issue with lasers, you basically need perfect conditions for firing. Rain, fog, snow, even high levels of humidity make it a no-go.

Good point.

5 minutes ago, Waiting4Someday said:

Rather than attacking the drone is there means to jam it’s communication or guidance system? The idea of exchanging stingers/ other ordinance for lower tech doesn’t seem sustainable industrially (although better than losing soldiers).

Depends on their level of sophistication but yeah I would think this would be the first line of defense against them. The issue would be avoiding interference to our own comms or friendlies. 

4 minutes ago, Waiting4Someday said:

Rather than attacking the drone is there means to jam it’s communication or guidance system? The idea of exchanging stingers/ other ordinance for lower tech doesn’t seem sustainable industrially (although better than losing soldiers).

No, you’re absolutely right.

At the end of the day, war is in large part a game of economy. You need resources to win.

The biggest problem today is that, unlike in day WW2, you basically fight with what you have at the start of the war. Development and production times of modern equipment is so long that you have to keep inventories high.

So when we talk about defending against mass attacks, it gets very expensive very quickly.

8 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Depends on their level of sophistication but yeah I would think this would be the first line of defense against them. The issue would be avoiding interference to our own comms or friendlies. 

An increased level of complexity would at least up the ante on the drone requirements and sophistication of the semi conductors needed (these are obviously sanctioned).

Crowd funding in the war.  LINK

2 minutes ago, TEW said:

No, you’re absolutely right.

At the end of the day, war is in large part a game of economy. You need resources to win.

The biggest problem today is that, unlike in day WW2, you basically fight with what you have at the start of the war. Development and production times of modern equipment is so long that you have to keep inventories high.

So when we talk about defending against mass attacks, it gets very expensive very quickly.

The Chinese may have a better strategy going with high volume-lower tier systems and shoot first.

5 minutes ago, Waiting4Someday said:

The Chinese may have a better strategy going with high volume-lower tier systems and shoot first.

They have a pretty big advantage compared to Russia in that the logistics of fighting them are much more challenging.

I think you need a mix. The US approach of high tech is good because it tends to give you a huge advantage in the early days of a war.

But this advantage is being slowly eroded, as China has what looks to be some pretty advanced home grown airframes of their own along with hypersonic missiles to keep our carriers far away from them.

Ultimately the US is going to need a mix. We need to win the early war with tech but we also need numbers.

I keep thinking that Project Mayhem and our attempts to build a hypersonic bomber will go a long way in the pacific, assuming that we can figure out the technical challenges. Instead of spending $100M per hypersonic missile, spend $1 billion (or whatever) on an airframe that can drop cheap bombs over and over again.

30 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

True, it depends on what exactly is vulnerable to drone attacks, but generally speaking, you don't want to put yourself in the position of firing million dollar missiles to take out thousand dollar drones at scale. Basically, we need a cheaper version of the iron dome.

I believe the Israelis have come up with something called ‘iron fist’ that detects incoming rockets/missiles and shoots out an intercepting projectile. This is designed for tanks, but it would be interesting if was used Ukraine to allow more armor mobility (very interesting if a fixed wing/ helicopter version was developed).

1 minute ago, Waiting4Someday said:

I believe the Israelis have come up with something called ‘iron fist’ that detects incoming rockets/missiles and shoots out an intercepting projectile. This is designed for tanks, but it would be interesting if was used Ukraine to allow more armor mobility (very interesting if a fixed wing/ helicopter version was developed).

I wonder if a drone taking out a drone is a viable option? 

4 minutes ago, TEW said:

They have a pretty big advantage compared to Russia in that the logistics of fighting them are much more challenging.

I think you need a mix. The US approach of high tech is good because it tends to give you a huge advantage in the early days of a war.

But this advantage is being slowly eroded, as China has what looks to be some pretty advanced home grown airframes of their own along with hypersonic missiles to keep our carriers far away from them.

Ultimately the US is going to need a mix. We need to win the early war with tech but we also need numbers.

I keep thinking that Project Mayhem and our attempts to build a hypersonic bomber will go a long way in the pacific, assuming that we can figure out the technical challenges. Instead of spending $100M per hypersonic missile, spend $1 billion (or whatever) on an airframe that can drop cheap bombs over and over again.

My worry is that our F-22 fleet gets hit on the ground in Okinawa. Taiwan shouldn’t keep anything of military value above ground for the same reason. Submarines I think are our best deterrent.

3 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

I wonder if a drone taking out a drone is a viable option? 

Yeah, probably but I think we getting close to Skynet type tech there.

Just now, Waiting4Someday said:

Yeah, probably but I think we getting close to Skynet type tech.

I'm just figuring the cost for a specialized drone (that wouldn't need a ton of range as a defensive measure) would be a lot less than a missile or even gun based system. I dunno, just wasting time until the game starts lol.

1 hour ago, Boogyman said:

I'm just figuring the cost for a specialized drone (that wouldn't need a ton of range as a defensive measure) would be a lot less than a missile or even gun based system. I dunno, just wasting time until the game starts lol.

I think it has been done with a human operator already  - I just figured running a 24/7 hunter drone CAP along a large front probably requires AI given the lack of early warning. 

4 minutes ago, Waiting4Someday said:

I think it has been done with a human operator already  - I just figured running a 24/7 hunter drone CAP along large front probably requires AI given the lack of early warning. 

I know there are drones made to take down civilian drones that are man operated. I agree they would need to be automated to be feasible.

1 hour ago, Waiting4Someday said:

I believe the Israelis have come up with something called ‘iron fist’ that detects incoming rockets/missiles and shoots out an intercepting projectile. This is designed for tanks, but it would be interesting if was used Ukraine to allow more armor mobility (very interesting if a fixed wing/ helicopter version was developed).

Iron dome, and used in urban environments too I believe (mounted on buildings.)

For those not familiar with this channel, the Brit who is doing the interview is the noted aviation author Steve Davies.  The doode he's interviewing is a former backseater in the F-4G.  The title of the site refers to the axiom that any fighter pilot story only has to be 10% true.

 

 

48 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Iron dome, and used in urban environments too I believe (mounted on buildings.)

 

See link below.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Fist_(countermeasure)

Breaking news:

Putin is still a poosay

Stay tuned for future updates 

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/04/russia-ukraine-live-updates.html

Meanwhile, Russian missiles hit populated areas of Ukraine’s southern Zaporizhzhia, the region’s governor said, although no casualties were reported. As the battles around Kherson and other parts of Ukraine’s southeast press on, reports of low Russian troop morale continue, with the UK’s Defence Ministry suggesting that Russian troops are being ordered to shoot their own soldiers if they try to retreat. Accounts of this have been shared in independent Russian media outlets.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.