lancets

/k/ insists that they're useless trash but there's a lot of footage of them destroying ukrainian equipment. additionally, they seem like a good idea on paper, like an FPV drone but with much greater range and loiter time.
is there's something I'm missing?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >lots of footage
    Its doubtful that half of them are actually destroyed. There are videos that showed the aftermath of lanclet attacks, which showed the drone barely dent the vehicle it was targeting.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I've heard of this happening for the pzh-2000 thanks to the rubber spike armor, and I imagine it would happen if a tank was hit in most places. I've seen lots of hits on vehicles like IFVs and SPGs that then went up in flames, though (filmed by a spotter drone)

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's hit-and-miss. There was a famous Lancet hit where an artillery piece suffered a direct hit, but the artillery crew themselves posted photos of the repairs a day after. The metal structure had been damaged but not critical pressure bearing parts, and one of the wheels had been punctured by frag.
        SPGs and IFVs storing ammo inside will catch fire if the HEAT round lights off the propellant.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If the Lancet was actually good, Russia would've won already.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >is there's something I'm missing?
    -they aren't very good
    -it still makes it one of the best things have in comparison
    -vatniks overhype their capability and use them as some token 'see? we also got stuff that works. /k/ btfo forever' response and to distract from the lastest russian frickup or loss

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >lancet
    If it was good, there woud;l be no need to fake shit.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >lots of footage
    >destroying
    I have literally seen a lancet fail to penetrate an up-armored humvee window. And another video where it didn't get a mobility kill on a civilian vehicle. And another where it smacked head-on into a BMP and didn't even slow it down, let alone cause any damage

    Like I genuinely don't understand why russia keeps fielding these things, they are only effective against artillery and even then, the tiny payload and minimal fragmentation means that most hits can be dealt with by swapping out the barrel

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's rather simple to explain though. What other weapon could they use? They don't have GMLRS readily available. They use the Lancet because it's all they have in relevant numbers to strike targets at a certain range.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Lancet pajeet needs to make rent. Plz understand.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Then post some.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This thread is very embarrassing for Russia. The lancets didn’t inflict any losses if at all, it was just desperately spammed by vatniks, causing everyone to support Ukraine.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This isn't a Lancet, but it does comparable damage.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    based on what I can gather they are a big nuisance and are widely talked about by Ukrainian soldiers, but when you look at visually confirmed losses, they are rather anemic and often merely damage equipment rather than destroying it outright. In fact FPV drones seem to have a better chance of actually destroying the targets based on observable data, presumably because they're more agile and accurate. Definitely not useless like people say they are and probably the most impressive indigenous russian drone, but not a game changer like the pajeet shill seems to want to push either.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How big is the warhead on a lancet?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Not very, aside from EW vulnerability that's its biggest weakness

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      smol
      Supposedly newer models have bigger ones, but I'd take that with a shovel or two of salt.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        For a moment I thought it was a fricking RPG-43 handgrenade.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    What you are missing dear vatnig is that the class of loitering munitions over all is is good and amazing. But the lancet ist still shit.

    Its kinda like saying wow ladas are amazing cars look how well they transport people! Most of the time they even reach the destination!

    It the the performance of the class itself that's good. Not the Russian iterration.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The Lancet-3 is using AI for homing in on targets. There's a Ukrainian article that shows one being taken apart, supposedly showing an NVIDIA Jetson TX2 that powers the AI: https://mil.in.ua/uk/news/v-ukrayini-pokazaly-nachynku-trofejnogo-lantseta/

    This webm is probably showing a Lancet-3 using AI to hit its target, since the second row of wings is smaller than the first. Sanctions are probably fricking with the production capacities a lot though.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >just set the camo cover on fire
      It's ovyr for HATO wunderfaffe...

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    it's a subpar weapon tbh, but as others have said that probably still makes it one of the better things russia has fielded this war.

    what stops me from being nice to it is the constant entourage of vatBlack folk, specifically the lancetjeet who keeps raiding to whine about how good it is like some teenage girl showing off her make-up.
    they come over here to shill it so much, sometimes i wonder if they're just really insecure about it and asking for approval.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >is there's something I'm missing?
    Yes, that you're on /k/ in 2024.

    Other than that, the lancet is comparatively expensive and its payload is small. The Shahed's payload is roughly 10x bigger.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It seems to be a pretty decent bridge between an FPV drone and a full on missle, despite the payload being light for what it is. When it's going after lightly armored vehicles or artillery crammed with ammo that doesn't matter as much though. /k/ as a collective will never admit that it's anything but shit though because saying anything remotely implying that Russians aren't literal cavemen who will collapse in two more weeks is enough to seriously rile up the Ukrainian hugboxers

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's not that I necessarily like /k/ posters who pretend like russia isn't a serious threat and sandbag any objective discussion of Russian weapons, it's just that their vatnik equivalents on /chug/ are gaygier and more obnoxious in every possible way, on top of being c**ts that support a genocidal petrostate, so I put up with it. It's a shame that useful information gets buried under propaganda and denial, but such is the nature of the information war, which russia themselves pioneered.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >destroying ukrainian equipment
    Most of those “destroys” are repaired and returned to action same day, the Lancet doesn’t have a large explosive charge.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >/k/ insists that they're useless trash but there's a lot of footage of them destroying ukrainian equipment.
    Damaging, often only lightly so. The warhead is pitiful for the size/weight/range class.
    >additionally, they seem like a good idea on paper, like an FPV drone but with much greater range and loiter time.
    It would be much better with a heavier warhead. Even though it has great range, it can't really take advantage of that.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They're not "useless trash", they're actually superior to pretty much any other Russian loitering munition design because they're basically just a ripoff of an Israeli Hero that's been made shitty by using whatever garbage parts Russia can scrounge up like old Soviet demo charges as the warheads.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The warhead is complete trash and there is a reason you don’t see Israel using it.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *