Ultimate force multiplier

You know what's scary? The number of the fpv drones on the current battlefield is only limited by the scaling lag of the production facilities, which is temporary.
For the price of one Ka-52, the supposed tank killer, you could buy 32000 fpv drones and kill at least a thousand tanks. The moment we are able to produce that much and train enough drone operators, the warfare becomes something completely new with all the implications you could imagine. Any armoured assault becomes impossible. Any infantry close to the frontline becomes dead in a matter of minutes. The future of war will look like a bunch of missiles flying back and forth with nothing in-between.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >they shoot down the drones

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      With what? Any guided or smart fuzed munitions automatically become at least as expensive as the drones, usually much more so.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        acoustic fuzes are relatively cheap

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          > acoustic fuzes
          > cheap
          > effective
          U wut m8.

          https://i.imgur.com/6maaMjA.png

          >ogic for autonomy that would be good enough to release into a civilian heavy environment would be too bulky and too heavy for a drone, would need to keep the AI in the cloud...
          >if you make drone bulky enough to carry all the shit it needs to process targets properly, then its too easy to detect and shoot down anyway, and also too expensive
          Are you high? Tons of low SWaP options. Nvidia jetson, Syntiant Tiny ML; all very low power and very low cost. YoLO algo's also allow this stuff to happen quickly on anemic hardware. Lancet uses the NVIDIA jetson card already, and is a pretty small platform.

          >good luck slippin that one through in a liberal democracy
          There are already contracts being handed out for this exact thing.

          >use rf sensors to triangulate where drone operators are
          >flatten the place in the ass
          >????
          >profit!
          You can probably triangulate the drone itself, but the operator is a different game entirely. Offsetting the position of the controller, frequency hopping, and directional antennas can dramatically increase the suitability of the system.

          Are you the Nvidia Jetson bro? It's discontinued and apparently has a ton of issues with the control surface and crashes.

          > Lancet uses the NVIDIA jetson card already, and is a pretty small platform.
          The Russian Lancet? For real? That would be insane if it turned out to be true.

          > You can probably triangulate the drone itself, but the operator is a different game entirely.
          You are wrong here - detecting the operator is as easy as detecting the drone, though everything you said does mitigate it. I am:

          > 3. ????

          The drone operator just ran a wire 200 yards away. You just bombed a $20 wire and probably didn't get it. Hopefully you felt pretty smart for a second there anon. I know you really tried.

          And how does that refute my point that you are wasting an expensive shell on a wire going to a transmitter? The drone operator won.

          If you have a point, be more specific. Again, the drone operator is 200+ yards away from the transmitter. Your super-duper sensor found the transmitter. You call in a fire mission. The fire-mission, by the way, gets detected and counter-batteried. What, exactly, is your point? Genuinely.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Are you the Nvidia Jetson bro? It's discontinued and apparently has a ton of issues with the control surface and crashes.
            What are you talking about? They cost 200 dollars, are still being produced, and they do not do flight control. You would need to link the card into fire control system, see the lancet pics below for a good idea of how they work.

            >The Russian Lancet? For real? That would be insane if it turned out to be true.
            Here are full board pictures of everything inside a lancet. Their claim that this is an Iranian copycat is erroneous at best; but the black and orange cards are nvidia jetson. The green card next to it in the 10th and 12th images are the carrier card that directly interfaces with the EO/IR package. The parts for the other cameras appear to be unpopulated, probably because thermal cameras are expensive.
            https://reibert.info/threads/oni-upali-poteri-vvs-kacapstana.643636/page-381#post-15453866

            >You are wrong here - detecting the operator is as easy as detecting the drone, though everything you said does mitigate it.
            Not at all true. Video feeds from drones have to be continuous. Operator commands do not. Drones could easily be flown through an area while receiving minimal inputs on predefined paths.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              1. Closer to $300 when you consider the supply pack and other peripherals.
              2. The OS is prone to crashing and overall has less support than the PI.
              3. For control surfaces, I mean pin outputs - not as robust or Pi or arduino.

              The Lancet info is super interesting. Kind of funny with the sanctions.

              > Not at all true. Video feeds from drones have to be continuous. Operator commands do not. Drones could easily be flown through an area while receiving minimal inputs on predefined paths.
              I will give you that one, especially now that

              no, im actually convinced to a degree

              is motivating me not to argue where I could be wrong.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I can see what you mean with control surfaces now. I haven't had much experience with using the PI as a candidate for image recognition hardware, but that could also probably fit into the swap requirements.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                In short, the Pi sucks for it. Sure, it can run OpenCV...but at 10FPS or something, at low resolution. People claim they hook them up to video cards, but it's a pain and not worth it because of all the extra effort to power the card, etc. The Jetson Nano is really the only option for multiple cameras at decent resolution. I guess I am judging it harshly because it's another system to learn and everything related to robotics gets extremely complicated fast once you step away from the typical examples.

                Not really a good option for drones. Generally they are actually using cheap rangefinder parts these days. They cost 124 USD or so and hook up to a set of fets to drive power into a heating coil to ignite the initial explosive. Very cheap and effective.

                What are you even talking about? Like give a concrete example of a shell.

                > acoustic fuze
                > range finder

                Those are independent of another. Acoustic implies triggered by sound. Like a proximity fuse.

                Rangefinder implies that the shell is programmed as it comes out of the barrel. The two are basically mutually exclusive.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          show me a fricking acoustic fuze for gun-fired shells that reliably triggers on drones (and doesn't cost more than the $100 drone itself).

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Not really a good option for drones. Generally they are actually using cheap rangefinder parts these days. They cost 124 USD or so and hook up to a set of fets to drive power into a heating coil to ignite the initial explosive. Very cheap and effective.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >They cost 124 USD or so
              so already out of scope for something intended to counter drones. most unguided shells won't hit.
              >d hook up to a set of fets
              The fricking ignition mechanism isn't being questioned here. I asked you to show me an acoustic detector that can simultaneously withstand being fired from a gun, not trigger on the sound of being in a supersonic shell and somehow reliably trigger on the barely perceptible signature of a quadrotor drone - while costing less than the drone

              Such a thing doesn't exist and will probably never exist, simple as. If you wanna counter drones the only really viable option is directed energy weapons, because they're cheaper than any kinetic interception scheme you can cook up for reasons dictated by physics.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >the only really viable option is directed energy weapons, because they're cheaper than any kinetic interception scheme
                THEY referring to DRONES in this sentence, not directed energy weapons

                Directed energy weapons are expensive but they can be reused many times for their price.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >a single 2.4 ghz/700mhz jammer is put down
    >your drones are now useless
    please stop posting if you odn't know anything ty

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You should be in charge of warfare on this planet, master. You alone know how to fight fpv drones, apparently, because nobody else does.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        you smug little frick. you don't even know enough to counter what i just said yet you think you can post passive aggressively like a middle aged woman and somehow win? frick off.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I know enough to understand that you can't effectively jam large areas on all possible frequencies at all times. Which is why every modern instant of tactical EW sucks.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            and we're already at the "well things can be slightly different depending on scenarios so let me try to invalidate everything you say" stage 6 posts in.
            this is why nobody engages with you, you dumb frick.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Things are as you can see them in Ukraine, and in the future it's gonna be a hundred times worse.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Things are as you can see them in Ukraine
                moron sees a bunch of drones videos and never questions how many lost drones it took to get that footage in the first place
                proper dunning kruger

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                How many? Can you tell?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That's like looking at a war between two African tribes where one tribe has a couple of antique Martini-Henry rifles and concluding that the Martini-Henry is the future of warfare. Ukraine and Russia are both slavic shitholes for whom any technology developed after the 1990s might as well be magic.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                True, but an fpv drone is as deadly to an American as it is to a porknner.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No because the average FPV drone has a maximum range of about 4 miles under ideal conditions. It only works in Ukraine because both sides have been doing trench warfare for the last two years.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It only works in Ukraine because both sides have been doing trench warfare for the last two years.
                no they havent
                a majority of engagements have occurred utilizing the terrain rather than entrenchments with numerous small scale attacks being carried out outside of trenches

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You can operate drones over cellular via starlink, or something and get way more range, but that would be only viable for fixed wing fpv due to the latency.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >starlink
                >cellular
                stop posting buzzwords you saw on twitter you cretin. pick up a signals manual.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Satellite_cellular_service

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                again, stop posting buzzwords.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Now compare the weight of a starlink dish to the payload of a fpv, zoomzoom.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Btw imagine the war and occupation of Iraq but with fpv drones available at massive numbers. It'd look completely different, possibly with very limited boots on the ground.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It would look exactly the same, because there were jammers for IEDs.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            > I know enough to understand that you can't effectively jam large areas on all possible frequencies at all times.

            Spark gap transmitter. That might do it. I imagine it’s not too difficult to scan for certain frequencies and then jam accordingly, too.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Plus there are techniques that prevent jamming, you'd hear about them if you weren't self-absorbed moron

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >You alone know how to fight fpv drones, apparently, because nobody else does

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >make drones autonomous
      your move?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Make my drones better than yours, and have them hunt your drones

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So we're back to dogfights over the trenches.
          We WWI now.

          Whoever has the best drone AI wins the sky battle. I'm gonna paint mine red and give it 5 rotors instead of four and call it the Red Harron.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Typical smug boomer moron.
      If you had actually followed the war activy you would see that EW measures and counter-measures have been developing non-stop during the last couple of years. Drone warfare in 2023 looked different compared to 2022 and it will change again in 2024.
      Also we are talking about loitering munitions so cheap that even if you lose 10-20 to take out one vehicle it's a massive win especially when such tactics would be employed against western/chink armour that is several times more expensive and more complex to produce than the soviet shitboxes both sides are using in Ukraine.
      Hell you have seen a bunch of durka durka shitskins in flip-flops that have been starving for 7 years leave the US navy and air force without a strategic answer to cheap saturation attacks in the red sea.
      The future is now old man and you have been left behind.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >its another easily impressed hobbyist episode
        The countermeasures which take Ukrainians and Russians months (swapping frequency bands) takes western military radios (and jammers) milliseconds.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Extremely moronic/grossly ignorant take.

      Or, 10/10 b8

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this anon vs 32000 fpv drones challenge, sponsored by Mr. Beast

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/YYS6R3J.jpg

      You know what's scary? The number of the fpv drones on the current battlefield is only limited by the scaling lag of the production facilities, which is temporary.
      For the price of one Ka-52, the supposed tank killer, you could buy 32000 fpv drones and kill at least a thousand tanks. The moment we are able to produce that much and train enough drone operators, the warfare becomes something completely new with all the implications you could imagine. Any armoured assault becomes impossible. Any infantry close to the frontline becomes dead in a matter of minutes. The future of war will look like a bunch of missiles flying back and forth with nothing in-between.

      >WASHINGTON, Jan 28 (Reuters) - Three U.S. service members were killed and dozens wounded during an unmanned aerial drone attack on U.S. forces stationed in northeastern Jordan near the Syrian border, PresidentJoe Bidenand U.S. officials said on Sunday.Biden blamed Iran-backed groups for the attack."While we are still gathering the facts of this attack, we know it was carried out by radical Iran-backed militant groups operating in Syria and Iraq," Biden said in a statement. At least 34 personnel were being evaluated for possible traumatic brain injury, a U.S. official told Reuters."While we’re still gathering facts, this is most assuredly the work of an Iranian-backed militia group," a second official said.The deaths marked the first fatalities of U.S. troops in the region sincewar began in Gaza. Biden said the attack occurred on Saturday night.
      "Jammers will make drones obsolete...ACK":
      https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-says-three-us-service-members-killed-drone-attack-us-forces-jordan-2024-01-28/

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ?si=bp02-GuXft00WxJL

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Is spamming trenches with drones to soften the enemy, jamming everything and rushing infantry like in WW1 the future (old) meta?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The way I see it happening is that an artillery gun fires out a shell that unfolds into a drone and flies to the target, the drone identifies targets and sends them back to the gun battery, and then about a minute later everything gets flattened by guided shells.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How long until modern warfare as we know it totally ends? Tech will just make it insta-death soon, we see this sometimes in Ukraine now

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Well, China is currently working a biological weapon that specifically only targets americans/europeans so they can take over the world. Make no mistake, the CCP doesn't want to share the world or the solar system.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That sounds pretty existential, we should look into that but it's kinda racist, no?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah the CCP will definitely shriek about racism to silence us. It's already being handled, but far too late, the DNA data is already in China's hands. We will see in the future if nukes will be launched over it.

          https://nitter.net/committeeonccp/status/1750854037291794830
          https://nitter.net/Jay83214566/status/1750851257684943302

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Frick this nitter shit.

            https://twitter.com/committeeonccp/status/1750909240208666912
            https://twitter.com/committeeonccp/status/1750854037291794830

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Holy shit that's insane. China is a genuine threat as they have young people hooked on tik tok to a level that you will not believe, they have DNA data of westerners that they are trying to use to create a bioweapon, and are one of the only countries with enough people to effectively implement the human wave method we see popular in the Ukraine war. People completely overlook how much of a death grip China has on the world as a whole, and when you point it out to then they will either call you racist or dismiss you as a schizo conspiracy theorist. When will it end? Will people notice when they start landing troops, or maybe before then? The West will have to start making moves soon if we want to survive.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                my concept of what russia does is more meatrecon

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Jesus you guys know frickall about genomics. It would be 10x easier (and still virtually impossible with current tech) to manufacture a disease which killed Han Chinese people than a disease which targeted muttmerica.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            thank god @FirstName523023528905234566 stepped in to spread the truth the government is trying to suppress

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              homie what? It's the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Jay T
                >@Jay83214566
                >China could produce a “coronavirus bioweapon” as well as deploy robots that are controlled by devices implanted into human brains in future warfare against the United States
                thank god @FirstName523023528905234566 stepped in to spread the truth the government is trying to suppress

                schizoid moron stop spamming this thread with your schizobabble, kys

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's impossible to do, you dum dum

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          No, the dna data is gathered and sold by numerous for profit companies.
          It can and is then analyzed by people trying to apply race specific medicine or bio weapons or anything else.
          If you analyze the dna of huge populations you will find certain genes common in one ethnicity and rare or non existant in others. Figuring out ways to target populations with such genes is entirely scientificly possible.
          However diseases do mutate and change over time, so a disease made to only attack one group may mutate into one that spreads to unintended genetic groups.
          Controlling bio weapons looks promising in labs and simulations, but reality can hit hard when the resulting global pandemic has many new variants some of which kill populations they previously were designed to not infect.

          So it may backfire but it can be done.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Figuring out ways to target populations with such genes is entirely scientificly possible.
            Explain exactly how Black person. Genes are isolated and analyzed by ripping them apart then spending a ridiculous amount of computational power puzzling them back together again. How would you “program” a virus to do this?

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Just like there is certain populations with a mutated gene that makes them immune to many hiv strains, super computer assisted creation of viruses that attack or do not attack the Han population but do or do not attack others is entirely possible.

              Its all about figuring out what genes make people more vulnerable or resistant to different things, like many bio research groups are doing for medical reasons, then exploiting them to create diseases that impact people with certain genes more severely or less severely than people without said gene.

              Certain ethnic groups are more vulnerable to opiates, to anesthesia, to certain drugs, some can eat plants toxic to others. There is indeed enough difference that certain viruses could ravage some people based on genetics and be minor to others.
              But as I said diseases mutate, so what starts out not harmong han for example may mutate into something that harms them very much after some variants and sub variants energe.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              You don't necessarily have to peel apart the dna - you key on what the gene expresses out to. Find a gene that is different in the population you're trying to target, determine what protein or macroscopic (relatively) effect it causes, and attempt to build your infection to trigger in combination with that. I'm not an expert but that seems a more doable task

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah the CCP will definitely shriek about racism to silence us. It's already being handled, but far too late, the DNA data is already in China's hands. We will see in the future if nukes will be launched over it.

        https://nitter.net/committeeonccp/status/1750854037291794830
        https://nitter.net/Jay83214566/status/1750851257684943302

        schizo moron

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It has been reported on for years about China collecting data for nefarious purposes, and legislation from the US is finally coming as per a few days ago. You guys do realize covid came from a lab and not a bat, right?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >le coof
            Western world: economic downturn, overloaded medical facilities
            China: people literally getting welded shut in their homes, complete media blackout in certain regions, mass euthanasia of pets, who knows what kind of economic damage
            Implessive anti western virus, they should send more

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              You say that like it was unintended. Remember the Hong Kong protests immediately before the lockdowns? You probably don't.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Dronegays complete disregard for logistics and basic physics is hilarious.
      Drones have range and capabilities directly proportional to how small and cheap they, also you can't put 32000 drones in a small box, if you concentrate assets in such high volumes you necessarily generate a massive footprint that can be easily spotted and targeted and they have zero means to defend or maneuver out of danger by themselves, drone teams get whacked all the time by long range indirect fires after being spotted.
      Ask Ukrainians if they'd rather have a million FPV drones or a modern attack helicopter battalion and I'm 100% certain they'd rather have the latter, compare the effect that even a small flight of Attack Helicopters have on an armored collumn compared to drones, it's the difference from stopping it completely and merely slowing it down.

      I got the complete opposite impression, I thought that we had reached that point of complete battlefield transparency and instadealth before I saw that real war is still a lot like what it was in the past than I expected.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        There are repeaters, bro. You can make the range as long as you want

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Another aspect is how drones can be a force multiplier for other assets, it's not necessarily a competition, the most obvious example is the indirect fires and drone combination, which creates a much more capable asset than any drone by itself, then in the security and recon role for ground forces.

          Instead of making an asset obsolete, they might instead increase its capabilities and rescue it from obsolescence, a drone flying overhead can spot an ATGM launch and transmit the data to an armored vehicle with ample time before the impact.

          You still have to deploy the repeaters and the payload drones themselves, do you understand that in order to have a meaningful effect they have to be physically moved from your warehouse to the target area? In bulk, while being subjected to enemy actions.
          Drones add important new capabilities and if you are slacking off in this area, you are in for a bad time like Armenia, but the same can be said about many other areas.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Read on how mines are deployed these days

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I wonder how rapidly they can do that, mobile mine fields are another crazy part of the spectrum

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >I saw that real war is still a lot like what it was in the past than I expected
        Look how pidors are losing entire brigades trying to get close to Avdiivka. You can't amass a proper armoured push anymore

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That has been the case for a very long time, even in ww2 German armored commanders had to deal with that problem.

          Attack helicopters have been rather useless in this war. All they do is spray and pray because any AA would take them down close to the frontline.

          The role KA52s played in the counteroffensive proves that you are wrong, attack helicopters are still brutally effective, it's a very agile missile truck that can use terrain masking far more efficiently than jets.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Any force that lacks air superiority cannot amass proper armored attacks without taking huge losses.
          This isn't new to drone warfare. It has been the case forever.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Ask Ukrainians if they'd rather have a million FPV drones or a modern attack helicopter battalion and I'm 100% certain they'd rather have the latter,
        this statement alone is going to have you mocked by the dronegays. they're moronic and most of them don't have any actual knowledge of doctrine. most of them haven't even sat down and read any field manual online about the subject, such as FM1-112

        https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/1-112/fm1-112.pdf

        of course the immediate retort to this is generally something like "it's from 1997!!!! it's out of date!!!!" which is something that can only be said by a literal zoomer who was born in 2005.

        anyway to cite doctrine (yes i can say that here lmao)

        >Attack helicopters are offensive weapon systems. They provide commanders the means to deliver massed firepower rapidly and accurately, thus disorganizing enemy forces and allowing the friendly force to gain or maintain the initiative.
        >The ATKHB can attack the enemy forces anywhere on the battlefield. Commanders must see and use the entire battlefield to strike the enemy and prevent it from concentrating forces at a point of its choice. The speed with which attack helicopters can mass combat power at chosen points in the battle area allows the force commander to influence the battle to a depth that would otherwise be beyond his reach.
        in plain english this means that you have to use attack helicopters offensively (you can use them in a defensive operation but you are still using them offensively, you are going out to attack enemy forces, you are not using them stationary on the defensive) and you absolutely must use them with speed, aggression, and with concentration on specific enemy forces. you cannot divide them and use them piecemeal, you must use them as a complete unit.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          to continue
          >The Army's warfighting doctrine specifies that deep, close, and rear operations occur simultaneously. An ATKHB can conduct all three during offensive and defensive operations.
          you will frequently hear claims that the army isn't built for operations where the front isn't well defined and a lot of shit is going on at once. this quote from doctrine says the opposite, that attack helicopters are to be used anywhere from in the friendly rear to the deep rear of the enemy.

          >Destroying the enemy's fighting force is the only sure way of winning any future conflict. The operational concepts of offensive operations are concentration, surprise, speed, flexibility, and audacity. The ATKHB gives the maneuver commander, who conducts offensive operations, a viable force that can rapidly concentrate firepower at the decisive time and place.
          unlike what actual fricking drooling morons like

          >I saw that real war is still a lot like what it was in the past than I expected
          Look how pidors are losing entire brigades trying to get close to Avdiivka. You can't amass a proper armoured push anymore

          think, attack helicopters are to be used to destroy enemy forces. they are not used just for defense. you use attack helicopters to blunt enemy offenses, sure, but you also use them to destroy enemy defensive positions, reserves, and units in conjunction with a greater offensive. the attack helicopters destroy the tanks 5 km behind the front so that your units conducting a minefield breach never encounter said tanks.

          >During a movement to contact, the ATKHB operates with ground forces and is critical to the success of the advance forces and the main body. A movement to contact often results in a meeting engagement; that is, forces engage each other by chance rather than by design. As part of the covering force or advance guard, the ATKHB can destroy forward enemy elements identified by reconnaissance, air cavalry or ground forces.
          your attack helicopters can encounter enemy scouting forces before your own recon units do. they can destroy the enemy recon. they can find the main body of the enemy force and destroy it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Jesus Christ, man

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >it's right there in the book man
              letter of the law types need to take a nap

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >The mobility and fire-power of the ATKHB will permit the main body commander to overwhelm the enemy and maintain the initiative. This means that the commander will not have to pause and marshal the necessary ground combat power to attack.
            your tanks conducting a movement to contact (ie they're not bounding or proceeding extra slowly, they're together in some loose form and driving towards where they expect the enemy to be) do not need to disperse and begin bounding when they're within 5 km of an enemy unit. they can rely on the attack helicopters destroying the enemy main body, maybe drive around it, maybe get far closer to the enemy before deploying properly and engaging it. you save time and make your own position more uncertain thanks to the attack helicopter.

            Attack helicopters have been rather useless in this war. All they do is spray and pray because any AA would take them down close to the frontline.

            if you don't know what an apache can do or what it's trained to do, shut the frick up. nobody thinks you're smart.

            anyway continuing
            >As part of the advance guard, the ATKHB is used to attack enemy forces that are attempting to disrupt friendly operations.
            if the enemy attempts to attack you to spoil your attack or just frick with you, the attack helicopter can find them as they travel to you and kill them. you will not have to disperse, slow down, or stop.

            >As lucrative targets of opportunity are identified by other members of the advance guard, the ATKHB maneuvers to conduct hasty attacks to destroy or disrupt them.
            hasty attacks are, to the layman, when you just go towards the enemy with what you have and let them have it. you're not planning this for hours or days, you're just going at it. it gets more refined of course but this means that the attack helicopter can, organically, on its own, mess with enemy forces without you needing to stop and figure out how you'll do it with your ground forces.

            Jesus Christ, man

            i hate drone enthusiasts. i despise them.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >For attack helicopters, a hasty attack is made on an enemy force to retain the momentum of the entire force.
              again, you do this so you don't need to stop a regiment or division.

              >Deep operations, or raids, are activities directed against enemy forces that currently are not engaged but that could influence division or corps close operations within the next 24 to 72 hours. The ATKHB will conduct deep operations at corps and divisional levels. Deep attacks by corps ATKHBs help the corps commander to shape the battlefield and set the terms for close operations. Deep attacks conducted by divisional ATKHBs help the division commander to shape the battlefield and are used to allow
              you can send your attack helicopters BEHIND ENEMY LINES and destroy forces that ARE NOT ENGAGED, ARE NOT DUG IN DEEPLY, AND MAY BE CONDUCTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOVEMENT. YOU CAN KILL 30 TANKS IN AS MANY SECONDS 20 KM BEHIND THE FRONT LINE AND THEN LEAVE.

              DRONES CAN NOT DO THIS.

              >The ATKHB is most effective against massed, moving targets and least effective against enemy forces in prepared, well-camouflaged positions. Without the support of ground maneuver forces, the ATKHB cannot conduct missions that require the occupation of terrain. They can, however, deny the enemy terrain for a limited time by dominating it with direct and indirect fires.
              deny the enemy terrain by dominating it with direct and indirect fires. staple that to your frontal lobe.

              >Attack to destroy. This is a high-risk mission for the ATKHB. When given the mission to attack to destroy, the ATKHB uses direct and indirect fires to physically render an enemy force combat-ineffective unless it is reconstituted.
              attack helicopters can destroy entire enemy units. drones can not do this.

              anyway

              >it's right there in the book man
              letter of the law types need to take a nap

              >just because its in your book doesn't mean it's real!
              again, if you don't know how this is meant to work don't talk about it. it infuriates me that anyone could see your word vomit and consider it authoritative.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Tor, buk and pantsir missiles are coming your way. Quick, explain to them that attack helicopters aren't useless in an AA-ridden environment.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                yes anon, the COMMAND GUIDED MISSILES are going to track on a helicopter sitting on the ground at least 10 km away from the launching vehicle. you are stunningly intelligent and witty, not stupid and ugly at all.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No air defense network in the world is dense enough to stop the US air force, the US navy's air force or even the US navy's army's air force from SEADing it back to the stone age

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you don't even need to go there, any of the systems he's described are literally incapable of killing an apache doing doctrinal nap of the earth hellfire attacks. unless, perhaps, the system itself is being targeted by the apache.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                M8, APaches were downed in fukent desert by ak 47 fire

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                whatever makes you feel better about yourself anon. what you have said has literally no value. i could use it printed on suitably soft paper to wipe my ass.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Try to fly your apache anywhere near the russian positions, see what happens.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you are actually fricking moronic. i mean that in the nicest possible way. you need to be checked, probably medicated, and perhaps provided with a carer. you should not be allowed on the internet unsupervised.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Oh boy, you gave me a nice healthy burst of laughter

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                laughter is a common response when you've been called out, anon. please tell me, in visceral detail, exactly how an apache 5 feet off the ground firing radar guided atgms from 5 or more kilometers away would be shot down by russian air defense. please. make it long.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Attack helicopters have been rather useless in this war. All they do is spray and pray because any AA would take them down close to the frontline.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            skill issue

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              this, with the clarification that i do not at all blame ukrainian pilots for doing the calculated rocket lobbing from several km out considering none of their helicopters have the fire control, sensors or munitions required to do what this doctrine proposes.

              russia can get fricked i don't care as far as i'm concerned they should continue to do dumb rocket runs, directly over ukrainian forces. to do otherwise would be unmanly and suggestive of the pilot sucking wieners and having a hole in their spoon.

              but for the ukrainians they simply don't have the equipment required to do it. the first production apache longbow (the minimum i personally would be willing to take to the ukrainian front lines) was flown in 1997. at that time we all know what the ukrainians were doing, struggling with the dissolution of the soviet union.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Just because you call it out ahead of time doesn't change that posting a field manual from the Clinton Administration is not particularly relevant in the age of massive innovation in unmanned air vehicles and their deployment.
          That is like posting a manual during the Vietnam War, quoting strategies about how to use airpower, written when we were still flying biplanes.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            and there it is holy frick! i called it!

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Yes, you called it because it is an obvious and true counterargument.
              The problem is that you didn't then reexamine your own ideas and blithely plowed through any rational self-doubt.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                no, i called it because you people think that you're smarter than everyone else and that all doctrine is irrelevant. you are wrong, you are also stupid. tell me how any part of the doctrine i quoted is flawed instead of claiming the age of the document makes it irrelevant.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Because those helicopters are just as weak to drones as the tanks on the ground are.
                Being in the air is not supplying them with any real defense against also airborne drones.
                And drones can be used to cheaply saturate areas behind friendly lines where other means of defense are absent. Because they're small, fast, and can carry a satisfactory payload.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you are a moron, i don't even know where to begin with you. feel free to claim that you've just won the argument, we both know you haven't.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >attack helicopters are best for attacking extended positions or behind enemies lines or in other weakpoints
                What your source claimed, and what was true in the 20th century.
                >drones can be cheaply deployed to cover extended positions or areas behind the front
                What is true today.

                See how those conflict?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                yes anon, the attack helicopter coming in at 100+ knots, scanning for targets with its radar, firing hellfires at them then pissing off will be killed by some quadcopters. i cannot believe people like you are allowed to sign contracts or have children.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                So now those helicopters are abandoning any sense of stealth or capabilities of maneuvering quickly to engage cheap-ass drones, and effectively sabotaging their own mission to do so. While at the same time, any given drone can cripple a far more expensive helicopter with a lucky hit?
                See the conflict?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >abandoning any sense of stealth
                are you fricking delusional? attack helicopters are not stealthy, they are loud as shit and fire missiles. they use terrain masking and low level flight to hide.

                >capabilities of maneuvering quickly

                >engage cheap-ass drones
                they do not need to engage the drones you stupid frick, they literally have enough maneuverability and speed to outrun the enemy's ooda loop and kill chain. did you ignore half of the fricking quotes i posted that state that the attack helicopter is intended to DISRUPT, OVERWHELM AND MAINTAIN THE INITIATIVE?

                do you understand how anything works, actually?

                >and effectively sabotaging their own mission to do so
                now you're just making shit up.

                >any given drone can cripple a far more expensive helicopter with a lucky hit?
                yeah, an autocannon mounted on an ifv can too. and unlike your moronic drone shit, it might actually have a shot at killing an attack helicopter with good positioning and luck.

                >See the conflict?
                i see that you're fricking moronic.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >being too fast for quadcopters to catch up somehow means the attack helicopter will abandon mission and chase quadcopters in return
                what kind of aneurysm do you need to come to this utterly moronic conclusion

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Just as long as it's not more than 4 miles behind the front.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              People like you being near the levers of power explains why France got rolled so hard in 1940. This isn’t 1990 anymore, hardcharger. We need to prepare to fight the next war not the previous one so we’re ready for WW3 and not complacent. We have been coasting off of air superiority for decades and it shows. We are currently in a paradigm shift that is changing how war is fought, and if we don’t adapt we will have quite the unpleasant wake-up in a few years.
              Make no mistake; both Russia and China are gunning for a hot shooting war when they think the West is weak enough.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Also remember as time goes on things get cheaper or smaller. It's only a matter of time until you can make for example drones with a 3 inch barrel built on that are programmed to seek out enemy's then shoot them in specific locations at point blank range. Imagine a larger version where waves of drones that have longer barrels with a larger bullet which can pierce armor plates fire thousands of AI targeted sniper shots at any human or other designated target while other smaller drones fly into hidden areas with explosives or more bullets to kill people in there.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >WW3 begins, war were declared
    >100 Million basement-dwelling mongoloids curbstomp enemy forces from thousands of miles away with consumer drones
    >Youtube allows monetization of drone war footage
    >Former cowadoody streamers are now war heroes
    >Russia whines loudly, no one cares

    Kino, when do we start?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nukes are more potent than any amount of drones if you get desperate enough to use them. Don't even need ICBMs, tactical missiles with nukes can stop any production or logistic centers from existing and disrupt new drones being delivered to the battlefield.
      If fpv drones could travel for thousands of kilometers on their own power it would be a different question, but something tells me it's impossible without cost increasing proportionately.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        anon clearly hasn't contemplated nuclear-armed drones

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Most likely there'll be laser tech that'll automatically target and shoot down drones in less than a second.
    Drones will only be an issue to techlette countries.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      IIRC the Bongs are developing such.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Israel and USA too.
        Once you put them on the big planes they might make it harder for missiles too.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    warfare has always been like this
    the drone will be OP for awhile until countermeasures are made

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Z

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    These things can become totally irrelevant with the widespread adoption of jamming. It isn't actually the future of war at all

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I want nothing more than these small shit drones to be rendered worthless by advancing tech so gays like OP are humiliated. But they'll just scream about "muhchine learnin" and "muh AI" like it's going to stop a fricking high powered directed microwave.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      oh i can't wait for a few dozen apaches to make it to ukraine
      >xaxaxa i will kill these dirty ukrops with these drones
      >BLYAT WHAT THE FRICK
      >sound of 30mm chaingun

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    kek i use the same rushfpv cherry antennas on my quad and ground station

    what that guy has on his face is hobby fpv goggles tho those are not usable in a millitary setting. you cant use fpv drones against an army since they are extremely vuldnable to jamming and the source of your control radio transmissions can be easily triangulated and bombed

    the control signals are usually spread-spectrum chirps which are not THAT easy to track but omnidirecitonal high power video from a drone is piss easy to track so the enemy knows exactly where your drone is the moment you turn it on

    you could make a militarized version of fpv drones but you'd have to give them SLAM navigation, directional antennas and autonemous features

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I've been thinking about getting into FPV stuff by making one of those shitty pixhawk kits that you can find on aliexpress, and then assembling the FPV headset with a 5.8 receiver and some screen eyepieces I have. I don't know many people who are into FPV stuff so I would love to hear your thoughts on how one might assemble a "package dropping" fpv drone at home.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >pixhawk
        my impression is that theyre shit and expensive

        build yourself a 5inch fpv quad from any of the many guides available in youtube. most of the components are the same in most of those builds if you go for analog video (which you should because its cheap and simple)

        build it around a speedybee f405v3 its pretty cheap, you can connect it to your phone via bluetooth for tweaks in the field and you can later install fancy firmware on it that will allow you to use gps navigation im using one right now

        also go to PrepHole and look for the rc general

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >they are extremely vuldnable to jamming and the source of your control radio transmissions can be easily triangulated and bombed
      Only if the unit you are targeting is prepared for it. What makes you think they are?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        if this was 13 years and only the first multiwii fpv quads were around id say they are not ready

        but atleast against cheap radios the flip side of this tech is that blocking it is also ultra cheap you can just as easily build stuff that will detect and block frsky,elrs and all those radio protocols people most commonly use for the same prices you buy the radios themselves for

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >or the price of one Ka-52, the supposed tank killer, you could buy 32000 fpv drones and kill at least a thousand tanks.
    They don;t have much range and you have to put an operator close to the tank anon. How many tanks have you been within a few KM of? Those Ukrainians are brave, I'll give them that

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You know that little UAV that planted anti-tank mines the Ukes used? They figured out that they could use it to tow a train of AT mines quite successfully right across the tracks made by the initial armoured vehicle with rollers Russians use in their assaults.

    It's weirdly adorable.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    when was the last peer conflict where choppers were used to great success?

    it just seems like any competent enemy with a good enough AA system will chew up any choppers, you might as well use drones in that case.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >FPV
    nah the real scary shit will be autonomous drones with two-way datalinks. imagine training an AI model to detect/classify different kinds of armored vehicles and filter out friendlys/decoys and it's also trained theo hit certain parts of the vehicle and ignore other parts like the cope cage. yeah they'll cost 10-20x more thwn FPV but they'll be more resistant to EW and deadly

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    just how much more expensive or bulky/heavy are EW-hardened drones compared to non-EW-hardened drones?

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    1. use rf sensors to triangulate where drone operators are
    2. flatten the place in the ass
    3. ????
    4. profit!

    >hurr what if drone autonomouse durr
    logic for autonomy that would be good enough to release into a civilian heavy environment would be too bulky and too heavy for a drone, would need to keep the AI in the cloud... which means you can still detect the EM signature and try to counter; if you use simple logic like 'see heat->kill', and then release 1000s of them, then what youve created is a weapon of mass destruction, good luck with less developed foes retaliating with chemical weapons; if you make drone bulky enough to carry all the shit it needs to process targets properly, then its too easy to detect and shoot down anyway, and also too expensive
    >maek killbots anyway
    good luck slippin that one through in a liberal democracy

    also, stop judging weapon systems based on how effective they are against russians

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > 3. ????

      The drone operator just ran a wire 200 yards away. You just bombed a $20 wire and probably didn't get it. Hopefully you felt pretty smart for a second there anon. I know you really tried.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        you do know there are loads of different types of artillery shells and that you can shoot more than one at a target, yeah?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          And how does that refute my point that you are wasting an expensive shell on a wire going to a transmitter? The drone operator won.

          If you have a point, be more specific. Again, the drone operator is 200+ yards away from the transmitter. Your super-duper sensor found the transmitter. You call in a fire mission. The fire-mission, by the way, gets detected and counter-batteried. What, exactly, is your point? Genuinely.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you know what, man? youre right

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Not sure if sarcasm. If not, this is one of the few instances on /k/ I have seen of someone not having a pointless argument. Respect.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                no, im actually convinced to a degree

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >ogic for autonomy that would be good enough to release into a civilian heavy environment would be too bulky and too heavy for a drone, would need to keep the AI in the cloud...
      >if you make drone bulky enough to carry all the shit it needs to process targets properly, then its too easy to detect and shoot down anyway, and also too expensive
      Are you high? Tons of low SWaP options. Nvidia jetson, Syntiant Tiny ML; all very low power and very low cost. YoLO algo's also allow this stuff to happen quickly on anemic hardware. Lancet uses the NVIDIA jetson card already, and is a pretty small platform.

      >good luck slippin that one through in a liberal democracy
      There are already contracts being handed out for this exact thing.

      >use rf sensors to triangulate where drone operators are
      >flatten the place in the ass
      >????
      >profit!
      You can probably triangulate the drone itself, but the operator is a different game entirely. Offsetting the position of the controller, frequency hopping, and directional antennas can dramatically increase the suitability of the system.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >logic for autonomy that would be good enough to release into a civilian heavy environment would be too bulky and too heavy
      are you fricking moronic? what does logic weigh?
      >would need to keep AI in the cloud
      your phone is using way more complicated AI to fill out the gaps between blurry shapes in your photos already, stfu moron.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Birder bros:

    Sadly I think drones will lead to extinction of many bird species near high value targets as AA has to target small drones. It just won't be possible to filter the birds out.

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