US UAV and UCAV Technology

US DoD will stop buying Switchblade 300 drones:


Meanwhile, France order a second batch of the munition for 65M$:
 
Last edited:
I think the US Army is going all in on the Altius series as a baseline system for various effectors with numerous launch platforms.
 
Last edited:
The 300 is too small. Warhead lacks stopping power.

For what purpose? Switchblade 300 seems to do very well for what it is meant to do, which is basically to let infantry platoons look over the hill or around the next building, and kill snipers, forward observers, and heavy weapon teams. Think of it as a flying hand grenade.

Of course, the next step up (Switchblade 600) is basically a loitering Javelin, which seems to have ample "stopping power" to deal with almost any battlefield target.
 
For what purpose? Switchblade 300 seems to do very well for what it is meant to do, which is basically to let infantry platoons look over the hill or around the next building, and kill snipers, forward observers, and heavy weapon teams. Think of it as a flying hand grenade.

Of course, the next step up (Switchblade 600) is basically a loitering Javelin, which seems to have ample "stopping power" to deal with almost any battlefield target.
I think the problem is that the 300 has been used against armoured vehicles, to no affect. The fact they're talking about tanks overcoming what's basically a 40mm rifle grenade says it all really.
 
Last edited:
For what purpose? Switchblade 300 seems to do very well for what it is meant to do, which is basically to let infantry platoons look over the hill or around the next building, and kill snipers, forward observers, and heavy weapon teams. Think of it as a flying hand grenade.

Of course, the next step up (Switchblade 600) is basically a loitering Javelin, which seems to have ample "stopping power" to deal with almost any battlefield target.
I think the problem is that the 300 has been used against armoured vehicles, to no affect. The fact they're talking about tanks overcoming a what's basically a 40mm rifle grenade says it all really.

Sounds like an operator training problem, really. And some desperation factor -- if it's all you have, it's worth a try. But it really should be grouped with other weapons (something like a fires team/section in the platoon or company) so the unit can spot targets using a Switchblade 300 and then kill the armored ones with Javelin or equivalent.
 
US DoD will stop buying Switchblade 300 drones:
Switchblade 300 seems too expensive and supply limited for what it does. If all you want is a grenade fpv drone people are planning 10k+ units at potentially sub $1k from off the shelf with resources of a wartime ukraine. Reuseable drones also does the job and still easily comes in cheaper and in greater volume.

Instead of spending large amounts of money on electronics warfare hardening (aka milspec), just mixing in anti-radiation variants for suppression ought to be sufficient for most battlefield use. The longer loiter capability of winged design over copters is not useful if you separate out recon and strike roles, and increases aircraft speed is not meaningfully useful for short range attacks. Deep strike with low payload is expensive with very little gain, a functional anti-vehicle warhead ought to be used with more expensive long range radios.
 
For what purpose? Switchblade 300 seems to do very well for what it is meant to do, which is basically to let infantry platoons look over the hill or around the next building, and kill snipers, forward observers, and heavy weapon teams. Think of it as a flying hand grenade.

Of course, the next step up (Switchblade 600) is basically a loitering Javelin, which seems to have ample "stopping power" to deal with almost any battlefield target.
I think the problem is that the 300 has been used against armoured vehicles, to no affect. The fact they're talking about tanks overcoming a what's basically a 40mm rifle grenade says it all really.

Sounds like an operator training problem, really. And some desperation factor -- if it's all you have, it's worth a try. But it really should be grouped with other weapons (something like a fires team/section in the platoon or company) so the unit can spot targets using a Switchblade 300 and then kill the armored ones with Javelin or equivalent.
You can probably still get a mission kill
 
Switchblade 300 seems too expensive and supply limited for what it does. If all you want is a grenade fpv drone people are planning 10k+ units at potentially sub $1k from off the shelf with resources of a wartime ukraine. Reuseable drones also does the job and still easily comes in cheaper and in greater volume.

Switchblade is way more than an FPV with a grenade. It's a credible surveillance tool with pretty good optics (including IR and maybe a laser). The ability to pull a target GPS location just by tapping it on the screen is a big deal, as is the ability to lock onto and actually track a target.
 
Switchblade 300 seems too expensive and supply limited for what it does. If all you want is a grenade fpv drone people are planning 10k+ units at potentially sub $1k from off the shelf with resources of a wartime ukraine. Reuseable drones also does the job and still easily comes in cheaper and in greater volume.

Switchblade is way more than an FPV with a grenade. It's a credible surveillance tool with pretty good optics (including IR and maybe a laser). The ability to pull a target GPS location just by tapping it on the screen is a big deal, as is the ability to lock onto and actually track a target.
Putting good sensors on a munition just makes sure that you lose it with every shot. It is better to put sensors on platforms that are reusable. You want to have external observer for strikes for BDA and indeed we do see a lot of this in this conflict, and reusable radio relays are very useful as well.

Now switchblade is not that expensive in the absolute sense that is why it exists, but if one wants to build massive swarms to clear entire defense lines, it is not efficient.
 
Switchblade is an antiquated result of government capture.
 
Dark Fury is hypersonic:

 

 

I suspect "kamikaze drone" (man am I sick of that phrase) might be a misnomer for "single use" in this case. It seems more likely to me that if this is an urgent need, single use item, we're probably not looking at a kinetic effector munition but rather an expendable decoy or sensor. Hard to picture what would be urgent need, launched from government launchers with government software, and deployed by small teams, My first thought was that the secrecy would fit if this was part of the NEMISIS program and that perhaps the government launchers were Mk36/53s on surface ships, but the "deployed by smaller teams" part doesn't fit. Perhaps more than one program is being conflated by the article and "Goalkeeper" is separate from the other purchase.
 
Thinking about this again - the price point would be about right for MALD-N bought in bulk, so that Raytheon specific system might be what's bought as the article suggests. I wouldn't think that an urgent need, but on the other hand that depends what you want to use it for. It occurs to me that MALDs would be a huge enabler for USN offensive missile strikes, since an F-18 can carry a number of them on stations that couldn't handle AShMs and they could also be on MREs on the inbound stations. You could flood a formation with targets pretty thoroughly and keep AShM usage to a minimum to maximize payload of the aircraft and inventory of the carrier, rather than trying to spam a target with actual AShMs. Though I would think an urgent need was a defensive need not an offensive one.
 

This reminded me of the plot from 2001 A Space Odyssey. :oops:
So the AF denies it? Did it really happen then?
If they denied something like that it might suggest it probably did occur if you look at the history of denials in such areas of military and intelligence technology.
 

This reminded me of the plot from 2001 A Space Odyssey. :oops:
So the AF denies it? Did it really happen then?
If they denied something like that it might suggest it probably did occur if you look at the history of denials in such areas of military and intelligence technology.
What was that Sci-Fi story where the automated space batteries targeted the generals and admirals?
 
Aurora Flight Sciences Orion HALE UAV full-scale mockup from PacMin
 
Switchblade 300 seems too expensive and supply limited for what it does. If all you want is a grenade fpv drone people are planning 10k+ units at potentially sub $1k from off the shelf with resources of a wartime ukraine. Reuseable drones also does the job and still easily comes in cheaper and in greater volume.

Switchblade is way more than an FPV with a grenade. It's a credible surveillance tool with pretty good optics (including IR and maybe a laser). The ability to pull a target GPS location just by tapping it on the screen is a big deal, as is the ability to lock onto and actually track a target.

The basic -300 is probably soon going to be out of production. They will standardize around the 600 and there will be newer variants focusing on the -300 mission IMO. You can begin to see that with the -300 Block 20 that has now entered production. The criteria around which it was developed, quite a while ago, have changed given the current future needs. Much cheaper, less sophisticated systems will probably end up taking over the original Switchblade 300 mission with higher end and newer variants or similar systems replacing the need for systems with more resilient comms, performance, and optics.
 
Last edited:
HADES is not a drone to start with.
 
 
"We don’t have to learn the lessons, experience the challenges that other companies who are used to building more expensive exquisite systems have,” Fendley explains.

“It’s a whole lot harder to take a design or design-approach that’s been very expensive and figure out how to design it for less capability for half the price. If you start with something affordable and add some capability - like going from a target [drone] to a tactical system - you may add 10 to 15 percent to its price with new mission systems. We already do stuff that works and we can prove it.”

 
It seems unlikely to me that a force of only two vehicles would be more than a test or interim capability until something more robust were introduced. I suspect for the most part it truly is just a test bed for technology to be placed on other payloads with greater density and on orbit length.
Each could carry a lot of CGBs and be launched by a reusable LV.
 

It seems odd that they are referring to Kratos as a "prime". I would save that designation for Raytheon, Lockmart, NG, and Boeing only. I would categorize Kratos and GA as medium sized in comparison - a couple decades old and hardly mom and pop shops but not "primes".
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom