Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

warontherocks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 355 posts

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#341

Post by palata »

msgodel wrote: post #336
palata wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried it, or are you just guessing?

Yeah I've run various yolo implementations on my main computer and I've read what other people have measured on current and last gen raspberry pis. Again I think people overestimate how much compute this takes and underestimate how cheap embedded compute has gotten.

I see on the rpi website [1] that an RPi 5 costs 120$. That's 25% of the price of the FPV drone (500$).

Then you have to integrate that RPi to the drone, both mechanically and software-wise. From YOLO, you need to actually get into commands for the autopilot. There is work involved.

And another question is: can you order millions of RPis like this? If not, what is the cost of alternatives?

Not saying it's impossible, just saying that people tend to underestimate those questions. I know it from experience, I have seen projects fail because of that.

[1]: https://www.raspberrypi.com/products/raspberry-pi-5/

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#342

Post by dizhn »

ethbr1 wrote: post #286
sentientslug wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somehow I don’t think that’s their primary concern at the moment

Granted. But it's going to be someone's concern after all this is over. And unlike landmines, how do you detect and remove kilometers of cable?

If it had economic value people would find a way. But it doesn't. So.

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#343

Post by euroderf »

thesmok wrote: post #295
paradox242 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems to contradict the article, which among other criticisms, specifically says that these drones are more expensive and less reliable than mortars.

There are different calibers of mortar shells, bigger size has more range and power. I think author of the article has cheated by not specifying the caliber, because a 155mm artillery shell cost is more than a $1000, precision guided one cost is tens of thousands. While a drone capable of reaching 10km+ costs less than $1000, without payload.

Why are artillery rounds so expensive ? Is it the raw materials ? Is it the precision of machining ? Is it because of what's required to make the entire process safe for workers ?

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#344

Post by euroderf »

ponector wrote: post #268
Nicook wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you not read the article? One of his major points is that a mortar is significantly cheaper and faster.

Mortar is cheaper and faster, but it is about 80mm, not a 155mm. Good luck to hunt moving individuals with mortars, though.

Is the typical mortar heavy enough that it would benefit from having an agile robo-dog hauling it around ?

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#345

Post by [deleted] »

seec wrote: post #340
ethbr1 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was wondering about that. At military-industrial scale, that's a lot of fiber optic cable. And it's glass, no? So not going to environmentally degrade over time. Considering the fighting is mostly over agricultural fields, what are the long term consequences of years of war?

At the extreme of 10KM range we are taking about 2.4kg of glass maximum. Spread of over 10km. It is largely insignificant. Even if you had 100 drones starting from the same exact place and going to the exact same place you would find 24g of glass per meter. A single leftover beer bottle would be at least 6 times that amount. When you worry about stuff it is useful to do the work.

[deleted]

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#346

Post by euroderf »

more_corn wrote: post #287
scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great insight in this comment - in the 21st century wars are so unique that hi-tech weapons emerge specifically for certain battlefield applications. I.e. just one country over, just one slightly different conflict between different actors would require completely different looking-feeling weapon systems. It’s not something you think about, usually - so much of what we see used is made for asymmetrical warfare.

Yeah, so Taiwan. Drones or no drones? Just poking around at the news, seeing Chinese drone carrier ships. Drone carrier aircraft, landing craft being prepared, drone swarming being practiced. Pretty sure we’re going to see a lot of drone warfare in the coming years. I hate to put a timeline on it but the Chinese did announce one so we know what it’s going to look like and where it’s going to happen and when it’s goin…

When the battlespace is crawlin' with drones, floating hunks of metal large enough to carry humans and their vehicles are going to be prominent & vulnerable.

The Chinese are big on dual-use hulls. Do all these normally-civilian ships have mount points for rapid-fire point defense ?

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#347

Post by euroderf »

xoatic wrote: post #233
wltr wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>NATO tank invasion Invasion? Oh my, are you delusional? NATO is a defence alliance, stop consuming Russian propaganda maybe.

You mean defence of Yugoslavia/Serbia in 1999?

Basically: yes. If memory serves, NATO had no excuse to intervene until a neutral investigative team (of pre-NATO Finns) determined that yes, Serbia committed a big massacre of civilians.

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#348

Post by euroderf »

pjc50 wrote: post #106
aqsalose wrote: post #20

Many of the issues sound like issues coming from using improvised civilian hobbyist tech and doctrine being in its infancy. If current FPV drones are bit lackluster, it doesn't preclude 'next generation' that are purposefully developed for military use won't be useful. Also it sounds like the designation of "FPV drone" is specific to particular family of drones specific in current day and time, which may be something…

Western militaries have things like this: https://greydynamics.com/switchblade-drone-small-spring-load... More autonomy, but MUCH more expensive. Thousands or tens of thousands of dollars per use. The issue is indeed using mass-produced consumer drones. It's a bit like the widespread use of "technicals" in some conflicts: yes, a pickup truck with a .50cal in the back is inferior to tanks or armored cars, but it's als…

> Is it better to have a more effective weapon that you can only afford a few of, or lots of cheaper ones?

Ah yes, the "wonder weapon" mentality. This was a hot topic in Congressional hearings back during (IIRC) Reagan's presidency.

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#349

Post by euroderf »

bluGill wrote: post #129
varjag wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$100 is a cost of a 60mm mortar shell. It is a hand grenade sized munition lobbed from a Pringles can sized weapon to the range of 1-2km. This is generally not the thing that comes to mind when you think of artillery strike. A 155mm (dumb, unguided) shell would set you back 5-8K USD. That's before the propellant charge, fuse and amortization of the artillery piece and its 5 man crew.

A M107 155mm round weights 95lbs when launched. Assuming that is pure lead (this is false, but lead is very cheap and it gives us numbers to work with) I can buy lead ignots for $2.89/lbs. Which puts us at $293 per rounds in just materials. Since we assume the other materials cost money too, plus there is the energy used to turn ignots into a round, it seems unlikely you can get the cost to much under $1000 no matter…

But how much of the shell cost is the capital cost of precision machining ? And how much is the capital & operating costs of workforce safety ?

Re: I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

#350

Post by euroderf »

jansan wrote: post #19
TheChaplain wrote: post #6

The article talks about signal jammers, but as far as I know most drones there are remote controlled using fiber for exactly that reason?

Yes, he writes that after he left the battlefield they became more common. There was a video of a soldier wading through massive amounts of fiber near the front line. Just imagine that for each drone attack there will be 10-50km of fiber dropped on the landscape. It will not rot and stay there until someone cleans it up.

If it has value as a recyclable, it will be cleaned up. Does it ?
Post reply on HN