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

211–220 of 355 posts

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

#211

Post by ashoeafoot »

morkalork wrote: post #201
originalvichy wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that it is difficult to imagine another peer conflict in a similar geographical type reaching such a level that budgets should be diverted in a major way to develop these devices in the hope that they are some miracle weapon. Layperson politicians read headlines and think they are a first-level counter and not a counter-to-a-counter as you said :)

That is true, although I think a lot of what can be invested in, is transferable. Control software, targeting, AI could be adapted to larger or smaller scale drones. Manufacturing capabilities can be as well. ISR drones are pervasive and it used to be uneconomical to shoot down a relatively cheap one, like an Orlan, with something that cost as much or more. Now there's cheap counter-ISR FPVs. I don't think the future…

Drones could be manufactured from standardized components, LEGO so to speak, allowing for add hoc redesign and automated manufacturing . Foilwrapped fuelcokecans with a primer and a bus are where its at .

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

#212

Post by inglor_cz »

potato3732842 wrote: post #193
inglor_cz wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Most nations don’t have flat open fields where signals can reach far away drones unimpeded by line of sight for tx/rx." This is true, but flat open fields are precisely the places where major mechanized battles usually took place. For the very reason that manoeuvering other equipment in complicated terrain is hard. Ofc there are significant exceptions, like the Alpine front in WWI, where Austrians and Italians faced…

>Ofc there are significant exceptions, like the Alpine front in WWI, where Austrians and Italians faced each other in mountainous terrain for years, or the Hürtgen Forest in WWII. But a remarkable share of all major mechanized battles of history took place in flat open fields, or something at least resembling that sort of terrain (gently sloping hills with good visibility etc. etc.) Fighting through some portion of t…

I haven't claimed that there were zero such instances, but my guess is that such battles in difficult terrain may be ~ 5 per cent of the total, if not less. People and animals get exhausted easily in bad terrain, and it is hard to supply the troops. Even mechanical equipment becomes less reliable and more prone to malfunction.

Notably, the German operation Sichelschnitt in 1940 was very successful because the French command considered it unlikely that German Panzers would be able to cross the Ardennes in force, even though the French command was probably well aware of their own military history.

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

#213

Post by Zanfa »

dizhn wrote: post #124
abracadaniel wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched the video of one navigating a series of nets to weave its way inside and into the open hatch of a tank. It’s ridiculously impressive.

I watched a video of one being destroyed by cutting the trailing fiber optic cable with a pair of scissors. Also impressive.

Out of all the possible failure modes of fiber optic drones, scissors are pretty much the least likeliest issue you’ll encounter.

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

#214

Post by ashoeafoot »

speeder wrote: post #125
alphabettsy wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most nations don’t have flat open fields where signals can reach far away drones unimpeded by line of sight for tx/rx. Citation needed.

I saw some fascinating videos explaining that the terrain caused the war in first place. The huge border between Russia and Ukraine is completely flat grassland. This means that to Russia, Ukraine joining NATO is an unacceptable risk because that border is impossible to defend against NATO tank invasion, and the flatness go all the way to Moscow. A lot of people on internet keep poking fun at Russia inadequate tanks…

That same NATO that has problems getting artillery ammo because they decommissioned the plants? Is this dangerous alliance in the room right now?

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

#215

Post by esseph »

tguvot wrote: post #175
esseph wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was one of the first non special operations troops to use a modern infantry-company sized drone (small, low cost) to guide conventional and guided artillery in 2008-9 for the US. Laser guided Excalibur rounds didn't come out until much later, same for the laser guided jdams. And the cost of those is much higher, plus logistical an deployment cost, than a FPV drone. Edit: I also don't know anybody that ever fired a…

there are now laser/gps guided mortars. probably still more expensive than drone but easier to deploy

Yep, 120mms I think.

You won't find them with light infantry, but you will with Cav / Mech units.

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

#216

Post by ashoeafoot »

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…

Also, the tech hurdles can easy be overcome with motherships as relays?

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

#217

Post by kilimounjaro »

literalAardvark wrote: post #187
fdye wrote: post #180

Interesting read. Curious how the author feels re: the attack on airbases using shipping containers/drones that was so successful? Seems to be a unique case that worked especially well for (higher end I'm sure) FPV drones. Getting artillery in on shipping containers would have a higher likelihood of detection. Similarly, the ability to 'guide' in the drones with munitions seemed to allow for greater flexibility durin…

That didn't use FPV drones, they're rather difficult to control at 6000km and they didn't have operators nearby. Most likely it's the first major deployment of their semi autonomous drone tech, driven "declaratively". They've shown that stuff recently, they probably used it before showing it.

Ukraine’s drones were primarily LTE/4G-connected for remote operation

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

#218

Post by cosmicgadget »

adolfojp wrote: post #49
gadders wrote: post #25

I've seen some of these FPV videos of kills of unarmed Russian soldiers. I honestly don't know why the pilots are not prosecuted for war crimes. (and I'm sure Russia does the same to Ukraine, I just haven't seen those videos).

So if I see a drone I just drop my rifle and give it the middle finger and wait for it to go away and then resume when it's gone?

People defending their homeland hate this one trick!

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

#220

Post by wil421 »

dizhn wrote: post #124
abracadaniel wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched the video of one navigating a series of nets to weave its way inside and into the open hatch of a tank. It’s ridiculously impressive.

I watched a video of one being destroyed by cutting the trailing fiber optic cable with a pair of scissors. Also impressive.

Could you use a bunch of chaff in hopes of burning the fiber optic cables?
Post reply on HN