151–160 of 226 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think it’s a technical limitation that CIWS systems today only fire in one direction.
Wouldn't really improve things. CIWS is just best for a different threat model. We're moving into the "waves of drones with orchestration" phase and expensive directional systems won't survive that, and cost on the drone swarms is still drastically lower. Won't matter if you added ten ciws and ten fire-finding radars.
After WW II German u-boat captains said they were never particularly bothered by dazzle camouflage. Ten years from now I have a feeling we'll get the same information from drone operators.
Dazzle isn't meant to hide. Dazzle is meant to confuse a human trying to estimate course and speed in order to send an unguided torpedo at it. You need to look at hit rates to judge effectiveness.
EDIT: Also, IIRC, the most successful captains in the field didn't actually use the AOB method of determining the target's course. They would instead cross in front of the ship at a distance. When the ship's masts lined up they knew the ship was pointed directly at their current position and could calculate from their current bearing and the bearing to the target exactly what the target's course was.
In hindsight what the Brits should have done instead of odd paint jobs is offset their masts by a few degrees.
> https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2026/quadrf-can-spot-drone... You can't hide from drones. Attach quadrf to your drone and now you can see through walls.
If only it was simple rage bait. As a member of this thing we call "civilization" I can't help but wonder how the hell we got to this point. #rhetorical
Why do talented engineers keep going to work for these companies and building it?
https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-stunned-uk-military-...
After WW II German u-boat captains said they were never particularly bothered by dazzle camouflage. Ten years from now I have a feeling we'll get the same information from drone operators.
Oh, so dazzle camouflage is back. I wonder if the more sophisticated "classic" patterns would work better. They certainly do for human observers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage
Dazzle camouflage doesn't work on killer drones. Even civilian LLMs recognize that the object on the photograph is a military truck, except they can't explain why it's been painted to resemble a zebra. Most dedicated machine vision models easily lock in on a boxy shape moving along a road. If anything, the stripes make the trucks easier to see. The real answer to killer drones is a CIWS that can cover 2pi steradians…
They’re looking for camouflaged military trucks.
What they’re not looking for is a convoy of Zambonis painted in Toronto Maple Leafs white and blue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Close-In Weapon System The Phalanx defense systems you see on naval vessels.
Which is total overkill for the job. It very well might cost more to fire a Phalanx at the drone than the value of the drone. And the Phalanx has IIRC 20 seconds of fire before it needs extensive downtime for reloading. They need something in the realm of a big automatic shotgun.