Were these effective at all?

Were these effective at all?

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    i dont know man.. ive seen the explosions these little ones make and I can buy more powerful firecrackers at the local market around NYE

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous
      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yeeting that one FSB glowie who posted a picture of himself at the airport with his car a few days before hand was pretty effective.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Point taken but they seem to take out roughly 100x as many vatniks with a grenade and a quadcopter than they do with these.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          It's a precision weapon designed to minimize collateral and kill a HVT from a ways away in a simple, lightweight man portable package. Quadrotors dropping nades is just going to be generally more effective for use in fighting. It works well when you use it for what it's intended for with the objectives that it was intended for.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Doesn't seem like the right weapon for this battlefield context then honestly. Maybe some SOF uses. Interested to see how the anti-armor variant works out, afaik it hasn't even been used yet.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              I imagine the majority of footage is going to be sent to the US for evaluation first.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Hope so, they usually just leak that stuff immediately.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'm going to guess the Ukies have slightly more self control than the middle easterners.
                But who knows.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                so far i've been very impressed with the self-control and reliability the Ukrainians have demonstrated - i support giving them ATACMS

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        That car in the end was like
        >not my problem

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's not the kaboom you have to worry about its the little pieces of metal flying from the kaboom.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This is an assassin's tool. War requires more boom boom.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    nope. it's a lot more efficient to use a quadcopter to both scout and opportunistically drop grenades than to pay for one of these on a one-way trip in the off chance you'll find something small enough for it to destroy but valuable enough that it'll be worth the cost and size.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >the off chance you'll find something small enough for it to destroy but valuable enough that it'll be worth the cost and size

      an enemy soldier. Those things were made for sniping individual soldiers, ideally high value targets like officers, tank drivers, machine gunners, artillery gunners etc

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      If you treat it as an alternative to quadcopter drops yeah, it might seem inefficient.

      The 300s? Probably not useful in most situations.

      I can imagine the 600s being pretty useful for hitting stationary tanks though. Scout using a normal drone and throw a 600 up if you find a tank or BTR

      The 600 is basically a Javelin that is cheaper, lighter and has over 40km range.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No. It's a flying 12gauge without the loiter time needed. It's only good for counterinsurgency where you have to kill one dude that's being tracked. Useless in Ukraine's environment.

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Pretty sure most high value targets were already dead by the time these were introduced. Ukies probably used them up on randos shitting in the woods.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The 300s? Probably not useful in most situations.

    I can imagine the 600s being pretty useful for hitting stationary tanks though. Scout using a normal drone and throw a 600 up if you find a tank or BTR

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Who knows
    They're probably just used to dome infantry sitting in trenches.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >sitting
      Sucking

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    There is some speculation that Ukraine never even got Switchblade shipments.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't they have trouble production of the 600s?

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The use case for the Switchblade is to provide organic intel gathering / indirect lethal effects capability for the platoon or squad.

    So let’s say you’re in a recon team and you’ve identified the enemy. Switchblade lets put a sensor up into the air above the threat, and also opportunistically attack a target.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Anything below 600 is a complete joke, 600 might be useful but anyway, this is an overpriced toy for sandmoron wars.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Nah it's perfect for it's role. UAF just has a bit further to go before they reach the tactical sophistication of American troops.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Unfortunately, its role is to kill sandmorons on camels. It doesn't work if sandmorons have LTMB or even TIGR

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Russians have already said that these things, even if they hit, do 0 damage.
      Since they're flown by humans they rarely hit anything.

      The 300s? Probably not useful in most situations.

      I can imagine the 600s being pretty useful for hitting stationary tanks though. Scout using a normal drone and throw a 600 up if you find a tank or BTR

      And that's the problem with 600. Even a stationary tank is hard to hit by a human. When it gets below a certain height the connection is interrupted and what it ends up flying to is up to random chance you can't make last second corrections.
      A Javelin controlled by a computer which corrects movements automatically and much faster if more reliable in theory but that video the other day has shown that even Javelins can't hit moving targets.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >but that video the other day has shown that even Javelins can't hit moving targets.
        are you fuckers even trying at this point or just throwing the pole in the water?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Russians have already said
        Russinas only say the truth when they keep their mouths shut, you vatnik filth.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        you will be a nice Lada, ivan

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >flown by humans
        you pick a point on the screen and it homes in on it. you don't manually steer it

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        If the Russians are saying they aren't working and do 0 damage then they are probably afraid of them. You don't say "Yeah this weapon is really effective against us, I hope you stop using them"

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >javelin has a computer that does course corrections
        >a switchblade with more processing power than a javelin from the 90's cant do mid course corrections autonomously based on computer vision

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >all of this blatant trolling
    yes yes Javelin doesn't work, Stinger doesn't work, PZH2000 falls apart, everything the West sent was a failure but the mighty Rasha gets pushed back

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You dumb disingenious fucking moron, we have alot of viedeos of Javelin kills and the eficcacy is confirmed by the troops on the ground. The pzh2000s were well liked by the ukrainians untill the overengineerd pieces of crap broke down when under pressure like all kraut shit does.
      But these we have literally two fucking videos of these little pieces of shit and Ukraine didnt ask for more, instead bought more chink quadcopters, it should be obvious that they are useless or at best not as efficient as a civilian drone moron rigged with a grenade...

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        or maybe they're using them for recon?
        > The pzh2000s were well liked by the ukrainians untill the overengineerd pieces of crap broke down when under pressure like all kraut shit does
        try harder next time

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    We haven't seen a lot of footage from them. Only the one already posted in this thread afaik, which itself was somewhat controversial.
    I think they're sitting on these because they're worried Western opinion might not appreciate such an obvious assassination weapon,
    I'm also sure the footage is degraded in the clip we've seen.
    Like a lot of shit, we'll only find out how effective it was after the war is over.

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Also they’ve been a dud propaganda-wise. It’s not easy to record video from it first of all. They have weak killing power you have to get them right into the target’s face. Remember that video of those two civilians outside a checkpoint getting smoked? There hasn’t been a SB video since.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I am 100% sure these caused most smooker incidents. It's the perfect tool for that and also explains why we don't see them in the field, they all go to SOF.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah that would certainly make sense. They have about the same range as a small drone and carry about the same amount of explosives (or less) but they cost around 6.000 bucks, while one of those modded 30mm grenades that a drone drops costs, what, maybe 20, 25 bucks?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I am 100% sure these caused most smooker incidents. It's the perfect tool for that and also explains why we don't see them in the field, they all go to SOF.

        The cheapo drones alsoprobably easily interface with things like phones/laptops for video capture, since they're made for the civ market first

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Better question is if you think you'll actually get reliable hard evidence on how effective they are or not, and even so at best their use is primarily recon with a sidedish of "I spotted someone important so I'm going to blow up instead of return".

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