The USN concluded one destroyer could take down about five or six suicide boats. Then they decided to beef up their defences so now it's probably more than that. And drones unlike suicide boats are susceptible to EW defences, so in short, the answer is: "a lot"
The technical term for that is "a stupider torpedo"
Helos can't be in the air at all times and can't react to how close you can get a cheap small narcosub to a ship before detecting it with any possible technology.
Ports generally have netting and obstacles to prevent underwater infiltration, especially functional NATO-operated ones that haven't been gutted by corruption.
Worse in every possible way than a torpedo.
Modern torpedoes are faster, stealthier, can be wire guided (no EM signals), can carry bigger payload and detonate underneath the keel which is functionally unsurvivable.
The only reason Ukrainians are able to do this shit is because Russians are comically incompetent. This would -never- work against even a marginally professional military. Hell even fricking Sri Lanka was able to hard counter Tamil Tiger suicide boats.
Russia is just shit.
overall in terms of technology this war was a huge disappointment
everything seems just so bad and rickety and DIY
except for a few things like himars or pzh2000 theres just stuff anyone could build in their backyard
Theoretically if it had a large enough payload, only one. Realistically you'd probably need at least a dozen to land a single hit and that's not accounting for the escort.
China already has Type-22 unmanned missile boats, they're a joke. >Tiny radars can't see anything. >Hum drum missiles can't sneed against Aegis. >No range, little air defense, and poor seaworthiness, so lol suck on JDAMs without ever getting within missile range of a USN ship. >Now have to contend with NSMs in the littoral zone on LCS and Connies. >Inb4 they're crewed, chinks aren't people.
Against a competent enemy with a diverse range of options for close combat against small targets, this shit really only works if you get them into a port to attack immobilized ships under false pretenses. And that becomes more of a political conversation than a military or technological one.
Type-22's length overall is 42 meters. It's frick huge compared to the webm related (10 meters).
Turkey is working on small but long-range AShM, that can be lobbed from small & fast USVs or armed drones. With super sea skimming ability. It's going to redefine naval warfare.
Maybe in limited coastal situations, but against a blue water navy you're still running into the same issues. >Radar, engines, fuel tanks, weapons, defenses, everything has to conform to the form factor.
It's a neat trick that won't get any mileage without a real Navy to back it up, or they're just going to eat bottom bin PGMs without ever sighting their targets.
Thisgay adding, it's a good thing that Turkey is also a pretty big conventional ship builder. It's not like they're pulling the Iranian cope and pretending that drone tech can be their entire military.
>Sails outside your maximum range.
You can't.
what if these things are deployed by a submarine?
The USN concluded one destroyer could take down about five or six suicide boats. Then they decided to beef up their defences so now it's probably more than that. And drones unlike suicide boats are susceptible to EW defences, so in short, the answer is: "a lot"
The technical term for that is "a stupider torpedo"
By now it's a lot more than that.
Helos can't be in the air at all times and can't react to how close you can get a cheap small narcosub to a ship before detecting it with any possible technology.
>nuh uh, my sub is immune to helicopters
nuh uh, my ship is immune to subs
>any possible technology.
ALTO TO BARCO, AHORA.
Ports generally have netting and obstacles to prevent underwater infiltration, especially functional NATO-operated ones that haven't been gutted by corruption.
Why wouldn't you just fire a volley of torpedos at that point?
Worse in every possible way than a torpedo.
Modern torpedoes are faster, stealthier, can be wire guided (no EM signals), can carry bigger payload and detonate underneath the keel which is functionally unsurvivable.
a torpedo would be better in that case
this is similar to a torpedo boat, its meant for asymmetrical warfare
you just know the Taiwanese are FURIOUSLY taking notes
i swear every month the Ukis write another new chapter in the book of military operations, this level of audacity and ingenuity does not happen often
The only reason Ukrainians are able to do this shit is because Russians are comically incompetent. This would -never- work against even a marginally professional military. Hell even fricking Sri Lanka was able to hard counter Tamil Tiger suicide boats.
Russia is just shit.
Mfw the schizoboat posters were right
I knew it but I kept shilling that they were Turkish lmao
Apologize motherfrickers. Apologize to the Truck cuck right fricking now. I called this from day fricking one.
The 1940s dropped by
They said they came here to laugh at you
overall in terms of technology this war was a huge disappointment
everything seems just so bad and rickety and DIY
except for a few things like himars or pzh2000 theres just stuff anyone could build in their backyard
you are way too stupid to realize versions of these technologies will be developed further down the line and with a much bigger budget
Theoretically if it had a large enough payload, only one. Realistically you'd probably need at least a dozen to land a single hit and that's not accounting for the escort.
It would have to be a nuclear payload. You can't disable a carrier with a single conventional payload unless you detonate it under the keel.
One to take down a vatnik one. Frick you vatniks!
Ammunition count of carrier task force + 1
Does this mean it was a bomb boat that destroyed the bridge and not a truck?
It will be game over for carrier groups, once they can lob 200 km+ range anti-ship missiles from these.
Webm-related, Turkish USV lobbing 16 km+ range missiles
China already has Type-22 unmanned missile boats, they're a joke.
>Tiny radars can't see anything.
>Hum drum missiles can't sneed against Aegis.
>No range, little air defense, and poor seaworthiness, so lol suck on JDAMs without ever getting within missile range of a USN ship.
>Now have to contend with NSMs in the littoral zone on LCS and Connies.
>Inb4 they're crewed, chinks aren't people.
Against a competent enemy with a diverse range of options for close combat against small targets, this shit really only works if you get them into a port to attack immobilized ships under false pretenses. And that becomes more of a political conversation than a military or technological one.
Type-22's length overall is 42 meters. It's frick huge compared to the webm related (10 meters).
Turkey is working on small but long-range AShM, that can be lobbed from small & fast USVs or armed drones. With super sea skimming ability. It's going to redefine naval warfare.
Maybe in limited coastal situations, but against a blue water navy you're still running into the same issues.
>Radar, engines, fuel tanks, weapons, defenses, everything has to conform to the form factor.
It's a neat trick that won't get any mileage without a real Navy to back it up, or they're just going to eat bottom bin PGMs without ever sighting their targets.
Thisgay adding, it's a good thing that Turkey is also a pretty big conventional ship builder. It's not like they're pulling the Iranian cope and pretending that drone tech can be their entire military.
A carrier of what country?
well technically you could strap a nuke to one of those if you were say, China
so one getting through would take out a carrier