Small UAS / Drones and related general thread - NOT Swarming ones.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ0Gea7bOUk


Always figured that to be the case when people were harping on about shells per day and 9,000 vs 20,000. You can fire 100,000 unguided shells per day and miss with every single one, FPVs, not so much.

I suspect on the Ukrainian side at least the lack of shells has produced this effect. Artillery is still vastly more effective against troops in the open.
 
I suspect on the Ukrainian side at least the lack of shells has produced this effect. Artillery is still vastly more effective against troops in the open.
There is no reason to concentrate infantry when infantry firepower is not important. It appears to me that troops are forward mostly to dig and occupy defensive fortification and a highly dispersed approach is fine.
 
There is no reason to concentrate infantry when infantry firepower is not important. It appears to me that troops are forward mostly to dig and occupy defensive fortification and a highly dispersed approach is fine.

The Russians have been assaulting on numerous axis of advance and UAVs are not nearly as responsive or suppressive as artillery is. The lack of 155mm in particular is probably what enabled most of Russia’s advance.

This is not to say that FPV UAVs are not dangerous or effective, but I doubt under normal conditions they would inflict the largest percentage of the casualties.

It is also a little suspect that this particular individual has such detailed casualty information to come to that broad conclusion.
 
...UAVs as a core part of a modern Western land force.


the Autors must drink poison for this.
Core part of modern warfare is an reconnaissance and strike contour, which has only a part of the UAV.
Without artillery, aviation, tanks and comunication troops your core part is shit


P.S. Admin, you'd better get back from repression to the subject area. :)

Tanks? The Russians and Ukrainians seem to prefer "tank". Singular.

Like it or not but the proliferation of FOG-type munitions with integrated killer-ISR capabilities means armored vehicles are less survivable in numbers and more survivable in singletons. At least it might make presently anemic Western tank fleets more impactful since acquisition of relevant tank defense systems should be easier in small batches.

There is no reason to concentrate infantry when infantry firepower is not important. It appears to me that troops are forward mostly to dig and occupy defensive fortification and a highly dispersed approach is fine.

"Highly dispersed" is relative. A five to seven man assault section against a two man foxhole is a very serious attack these days.

Drones only work in fair weather and without EW. This is hard in the defense but easy in the attack. Artillery doesn't care for weather. Polaris golf cart doesn't care for splinter protection.
 
"Highly dispersed" is relative. A five to seven man assault section against a two man foxhole is a very serious attack these days.
You don't need an assault section against a foxhole. There is enough videos of drone bombing against foxholes and trenches to show that it is not really defensible in the long term.

A viable defensive position is a trench network with top cover, a set of concealed bunkers or a settlement with a number of basements. Drones can not easily access or attack underground positions.

So how do you attack such positions? First have your own forces interdict, suppress and destroy strongpoints so that the enemy have limited fpv and drone sorties out of frontline positions. With short ranges of evtols, rear areas can offer little support and an advance rate faster than enemy sortie rate enables one to close. Enemy direct and indirect fires can also be suppressed via drone enabled fires.

So you close with such positions. When clearing such a position width of the effective battlefront is one men wide so in theory you only need one men. You could be flanked in a trench by opponents going over the top, but your own drone force can cover that threat. The limited range of drones mean your own drone teams may have to advance to maintain persistent cover but dispersion can be far greater than forces limited by LOS firearms.

Now, if the opponent have no artillery you could send in more men at higher concentration, as drone overwatch is unreliable due to bandwidth, surprise enemy EW action, and drone supply issues. That said if the opponent do have plentiful artillery than attacking in forces of one might result in the lowest casualty for men lost, if the morale holds up, which it simply might not as isolated humans are generally not aggressive an tend to flee.

There is a reason why motorcycles is considered viable transport for ops. If all you need is someone to throw grenade across that L-shaped trench with a roof, why do you need a fireteam?
 
Last edited:
So how do you attack such positions?

The same as always: a lot of artillery, some infantrymen with grit and bayonets, and a tank or two in support.

If you lack this, you simply don't attack, because you can't.
 

1715092061640.png

View: https://x.com/TotherChris/status/1787849770033172484


View: https://x.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/1788509460257788107
 
Last edited:
One really has to wonder just what the cost of one of these bespoke military spec quadcopters will be compared to an off the shelf mavic....
5x,10x,20x?
I suspect this will probably only be purchased in very small numbers [if at all].
But it does raise the question of how western militaries are going to equip themselves with something like a mavic when buying off the shelf chinese drones is likely a total non starter both for political and technological/security reasons.
 
One really has to wonder just what the cost of one of these bespoke military spec quadcopters will be compared to an off the shelf mavic....
5x,10x,20x?
I suspect this will probably only be purchased in very small numbers [if at all].
But it does raise the question of how western militaries are going to equip themselves with something like a mavic when buying off the shelf chinese drones is likely a total non starter both for political and technological/security reasons.
As always it depends on how many you make.

Other news:


View: https://x.com/defense_news/status/1788270653096829114
 
Last edited:
Tanks? The Russians and Ukrainians seem to prefer "tank". Singular.

Like it or not but the proliferation of FOG-type munitions with integrated killer-ISR capabilities means armored vehicles are less survivable in numbers and more survivable in singletons. At least it might make presently anemic Western tank fleets more impactful since acquisition of relevant tank defense systems should be easier in small batches.
Hi!

My English is terrible, so the online translator gives preference to the tank. Sorry for this.

And my comment concerned the authors' erroneous conclusion that UAVs are the core part of modern warfare. It's not like that!

They are only a part of it, and most importantly, not decisive. Which does not negate what you said. Indeed, the development of technology has allowed the UAV to declare itself as a serious weapon. Whereas previously the military treated them with prejudice.

If we highlight interesting solutions in the Ukrainian conflict from both sides, then I would start with the Lancet and the Orlan (30,10) from the Russian Federation and unmanned naval drones from Ukraine. Let's see where this path leads us =)
 
Hi!

My English is terrible, so the online translator gives preference to the tank. Sorry for this.

And my comment concerned the authors' erroneous conclusion that UAVs are the core part of modern warfare. It's not like that!

They are only a part of it, and most importantly, not decisive. Which does not negate what you said. Indeed, the development of technology has allowed the UAV to declare itself as a serious weapon. Whereas previously the military treated them with prejudice.

If we highlight interesting solutions in the Ukrainian conflict from both sides, then I would start with the Lancet and the Orlan (30,10) from the Russian Federation and unmanned naval drones from Ukraine. Let's see where this path leads us =)

Sure, they can't replace other important weapons.

On the other hand, they seem to be "decisive" and "a core part" in the sense that if you don't use them then you aren't going to make much headway against guys who do. UAVs provide massive advantages over conventional/"traditional" forms of aerial reconnaissance and firepower in response time. That seems to be their niche at the moment: giving platoons and companies what divisions and corps had 30 years ago.

All the authors are saying is "ignore UAVs at your peril".

No one is suggesting to replace howitzers or MBTs with UAVs. But UAVs are sufficiently deadly, either by themselves or when combined with artillery, that they've more or less halted large scale tank attacks like were seen in the 1980's training exercises. So tanks and artillery will need to disperse to survive under semi-constant aerial surveillance.
 
Last edited:
Confirmed 3rd example of a russian operated mohajer 6,how many more are there I wonder?
These are clearly being used to hunt for targets but I dont recall ever seeing any footage from these in russian military vids,mind you I dont recall much if any video footage from the orion either.

"In the first case and the last case, the register of the drone was clear, but in the second case, the register was destroyed due to the fire caused by the impact of the missile. The registers in these two cases are close together, ER-860 and ER-858, which follow the ER-XXX numbering pattern that is specific to the export version of the Mohajer-6." [Translation]
 
Last edited:
Mohajer and Orion are larger vehicles more akin to the TB-2. They fly at altitudes that make them vulnerable to medium range SAMs and they are expensive enough to be hard to replace compared to the prolific Orlan 10.
 
Confirmed 3rd example of a russian operated mohajer 6,how many more are there I wonder?
These are clearly being used to hunt for targets but I dont recall ever seeing any footage from these in russian military vids,mind you I dont recall much if any video footage from the orion either.
an Iranian single-engine multirole ISTAR[3] UAV capable of carrying a multispectral surveillance payload
...but not finding downed presidents.
 
Last edited:


 
Last edited:
I’m a big fan of the ALTIUS series. The switchblade, less so, but guess it has a hot production line where as Anduril seems to need to expand to meet demand.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom