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

I'm going to rage again at the "FPV" term, the popularization of which seems to imply most of the drones being discussed the past decade weren't providing a "first-person" view from a camera in the drone itself. Unless the drone has no camera, they're all FPV.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
I'm going to rage again at the "FPV" term, the popularization of which seems to imply most of the drones being discussed the past decade weren't providing a "first-person" view from a camera in the drone itself. Unless the drone has no camera, they're all FPV.
Click to expand...
Rage away. They are different though.
 
shin_getter said:
Drones is also, strategic airpower (as seen with the other event)

In any case, no ground based solution ever "solved" airpower as airpower have the natural attribute of mobility and mass that ground based systems can not match. The counter to airpower is greater air power, and the counter to micro-air power would be air power with higher performing vehicles in greater numbers.

There really should be layers of air power from hypersonics down to bee sized vehicles with everything in between. Comprehensive defense and offense covers everything within those scales with combined arms between them.

Its pretty basic to drop hibernating/perching/etc drones out of penetrating assets for persistent sensing and interdiction. Higher tier air power can also influence lower tier drone fights by killing force multipliers with likes of anti-radiation, anti-logistics strikes. While lower tier air can infiltrate and attack high value assets. One can easily imagine high-low mix where SEAD efforts from high cost assets enables low cost aircraft access...and so on.

Finally, even small aircraft can have strategic ranges too:


The playbook have yet to be written.

The converse thought is that such legacy aircraft isn't decisive in the conflict and resources are better spent on war winning assets like fiber FPVs and infantry shotguns.


Perhaps we can say its a sign of failure that no nuclear weapon proof armor have been developed despite nearly a century of the threat. (or that CRAM have failed to be developed so make ramming the primary means of ship combat)

Or alternatively the sensing and fire control problem against the smallest independent vehicle on the battlefield is harder than that of other targets. Consider how huge and slow a infantry man is compared to a drone that fits half a dozen in a backpack while moving orders of magnitude higher speed with an extra degree of freedom while concealed under the same ground clutter with good pilots.

Do talk about what solution you are referring to, though.
Click to expand...
These drones have been utilized in a strategic sense for sure, but small size and low cost comes with plenty of limitations along with the advantages. They had to be smuggled into Russia itself to strike those targets deep within the country. That may be using an asset for strategic impact, but it's not really the equivalent to the capability strategic bombers or modern strike fighters provide.

You're correct that no ground-based air-defense systems have ever "solved" airpower as in provided complete immunity, and chances are they never will, but they still have a role to play in countering it. In that sense the last layers of air defense are much more important now since the sort of aircraft that can obtain general air-superiority and strike key targets can't also provide ground forces with protection from such a prolific low-level threat. Airborne counters to drones will continue to mature, including drones to counter those drones, but I can't foresee a lessened need for that layer of short-range air-defense on the ground.

The fact that those bombers may not be decisive in this particular conflict doesn't change the important part of Russia's nuclear deterrent they represent, among the other capabilities they have. They're not something the Russians can really afford to sacrifice for the sake of this gambit for Ukraine.
Sferrin said:
Rage away. They are different though.
Click to expand...
Then the terminology should reflect the actual difference and not a describe a general feature that is nothing notably unique or special. If it's being used to refer to drones specifically made to collide with a target like a poor-man's missile than it's still poor wording. I suppose arguing over such a thing is pointless, but I can't help but be mildly annoyed about what a bad descriptor it is.
 
Mr.T said:
Well they kinda worked one time in a sense of a decoy , Ukrainians went after two decomisioned A-50 that are even missing some engines
Click to expand...

I highly doubt they were used as decoys and the destruction of these two airframes (Including any mission-specific avionics still inside them) are now no longer available to be restored to flightworthy status, this is a big blow for Russia because they had so few A-50s to start with and they can't produce the mission avionics anymore.

Colonial-Marine said:
The fact that those bombers may not be decisive in this particular conflict
Click to expand...

Those Tu-22M3s and Tu-95MSs were used in the regular cruise-missile terror-raids with the Tu-95MS being able to carry up to eight AS-15 Kent cruise-missiles for example, not only does their elimination reduce the number of cruise-missiles that can be launched in any future terror-raids Russia can't build any new Tu-22M3s or Tu-95MSs.
 
hmm, I was just reading a blog post about how tanks is needed because "shock" compels opponent to surrender/retreat above and beyond direct combat effects. Well, drone do inflict terror on the battlefield, however it doesn't really force retreats because drones can't be outrun once you spot it typically at close range.

So it struck me: if one wants to generate a morale effect instead of a physical effect, one can put lights on the drones and run a drone show, doing a show of force to induce retreat at extended ranges without consuming munitions.

Maybe this bit of "fun" can be put to war one day.
 
Interesting to see how nature adapts. There must me huge amounts of fibre optic thread over in Ukraine now:

960x0-jpg.834744


https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidh...drone-summer-in-ukraine/?ss=aerospace-defense
 
NMaude said:
I highly doubt they were used as decoys and the destruction of these two airframes (Including any mission-specific avionics still inside them) are now no longer available to be restored to flightworthy status, this is a big blow for Russia because they had so few A-50s to start with and they can't produce the mission avionics anymore.



Those Tu-22M3s and Tu-95MSs were used in the regular cruise-missile terror-raids with the Tu-95MS being able to carry up to eight AS-15 Kent cruise-missiles for example, not only does their elimination reduce the number of cruise-missiles that can be launched in any future terror-raids Russia can't build any new Tu-22M3s or Tu-95MSs.
Click to expand...
Asumptions on what Russia can or can not produce has generaly been proven wrong time and time again , with claims of them runing out of missiles in like 2 weeks in 2022 , Now we are at about 2500 Cruise missiles. And Ukrainans geting wet over foreign content in electronics are now down to counting individual chips as made in the west

They can always go palletised throw a bombers worth or more from a single Il-76, but for launches into ukraine these can be ground launched as well.

Which every way you turn it Ukraine has escalation dominance as there is nothing worth blowing up in Ukraine anymore vs Russia , its economy hinges on our taxes paying everything from their salaries, pensions and arms without our consent ,and arms production is done abroad so generaly safe aside for 'inustrial accident' or two or mayor suppliers like India & Pakistan going to war and hoarding stock or Israel using to much to kill kids en masse . So we can expect them continue losing on the ground while trying to generate as much PR as they can in drone strikes and PR when they are struck in retaliation.


Sounds like AKPWS is being redirected . not supprising given the consumption of missiles in Red sea.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/06/5/7515708/
This would not be too hard for Russians to replicate in relatively short time given extensive experience with dropping armored vehicles even the gear could likely be repurposed just the missile box would need to be made. A single Il-76 could drop more cruise missiles than any bomber they have and An-124 could drop whole fucking arsenal
2025-06-04_06h25_37.png

2025-06-04_06h30_41.png
 
Last edited:
China was/is by leaps and bounds THE drone and component supplier to both sides in this war and even most western suppliers rely on their supply base . Its quite crazy to watch how many FPV components like electronic and cameras have been developed by the Chinese just for war in Ukraine and are sold to consumers just because that is how they get to the battle field.
Cheap pseudo NV and IR cameras , muiltifrequency TX and RX , evolved analog systems (these were practically dead market segment before 2022) , fiberoptics ........etc stuff no civilian needed



Now it seems some restrictions is sales are being felt

From 100 per day to 200-300 per month is a massive cut.


Altough i fail to see how this is done as i am buying FPV drone components in China all the time and have not encountered any limits to supply to EU.Even if there are any limits to export to Ukraine.


https://dev.ua/en/news/kombaty-vidpovily-shcho-vony-dumaiut-pro-defitsyt-droniv-1749105012
https://twitter.com/x/status/1931065221579149650
View: https://x.com/blyskavka_ua/status/1931065221579149650
 
Last edited:
Is this the right thread for posting videos to do with the operation Spiderweb drone attack and similar other drone-raids?
 
Sandboxx recently put out a video concerning the possibly of a Ukrainian drone style attack on the US:


Last weekend, Ukraine launched an unprecedented drone attack against four Russian air bases, destroying an as-yet unconfirmed number of long-range nuclear-capable strategic bombers and exceedingly rare airborne early warning and control aircraft.
Click to expand...
But could an adversary nation launch a similar attack against the mainland United States? Let's discuss.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that countries such as China, Iran, North Korea and Israel paid close attention to these drone raids and the resulting aftermath, this kind of drone attack IMO is the sort of thing that Mossad wo do.
 
I believe Mossad has already done as much in Iran, on a smaller scale.
 
NMaude said:
Sandboxx recently put out a video concerning the possibly of a Ukrainian drone style attack on the US:





I have no doubt that countries such as China, Iran, North Korea and Israel paid close attention to these drone raids and the resulting aftermath, this kind of drone attack IMO is the sort of thing that Mossad wo do.
Click to expand...
Dude is absolutely wrong in terms of how difficult it would be to get drones into the country. It would not be an issue at all as they can be bought en masse without triggering any alarms. Its also highly doubtfull Ukrainans bothered with smugling drones as they can just buy them on Ali express. Only part that would be difficult might be explosives , but even those could be improvised as aircraft are very soft targets.

For container launched missiles would not need to reach port at all and inside a port you loose control over container position plus there is much more scrutiny and security than outside ports.

Stuff he is talking like countermeasures have been developed but not realy deployed en masse let alone in US mainland ,besides you can optimise fpv drone flight profile to where radar would not detect them till its to late. Most of them countermeasures work against Switchblade style flight profiles


Ukraine style attack anywhere would have exact same outcome as in Russia , as most aircraft are not hangared all the time or at all ,and there is actualy zero airdefense capabilty in most of western world . US never fielded AD as it newer needed one anything it has is forward deployed outside US , most of Europe whatever capability there was in in Ukraine now. If drones were fiber optic EW is worth shit .
Only defense in Russia would be to have 4G shut down like the moment attack occurs but that is hard to actualy pull off , in the west as you can use starlink for the attack it would be even harder to do that
 
Last edited:
Mr.T said:
Ukraine style attack anywhere would have exact same outcome as in Russia , as most aircraft are not hangared all the time or at all ,and there is actualy zero airdefense capabilty in most of western world . US never fielded AD as it newer needed one anything it has is forward deployed outside US , most of Europe whatever capability there was in in Ukraine now. If drones were fiber optic EW is worth shit .
Only defense in Russia would be to have 4G shut down like the moment attack occurs but that is hard to actualy pull off , in the west as you can use starlink for the attack it would be even harder to do that
Click to expand...
The knowledge that this is possible isn't new, another occurrence of it happening to airbases even deeper within Russia should be another wakeup call. It's much like the worry about the threat posed by the proliferation of man-portable SAMs, but much worse.

Fiber optic connection has its upsides and downsides, and methods must be devised to exploit the disadvantages. But ultimately, they still necessitate far greater use of hard-kill systems to stop them. The gorilla in the room is the sheer number of airbases and airports out there which at risk to bad actors who can easily obtain drones and improvised explosives. Plus, endless numbers of other targets relating to infrastructure. Dream tool for terrorists, and how do you combat that without further going down the path of a complete survivance state? And people wonder why I'm a pessimist...
 
Drones have democratized battlespace more than anything since the crossbow.

I wonder if early, clunky firearms were a step back—reloading imposing the reliance on drill…pointing backwards towards the phalanx.

With crossbows, “everyone could have a go,” to steal a quote from a documentary.

Drones are the maker community’s concept of warfighting.
 
All wars after 2019 and their outcomes will be dependent on missiles and drones.
 
publiusr said:
Drones have democratized battlespace more than anything since the crossbow.

I wonder if early, clunky firearms were a step back—reloading imposing the reliance on drill…pointing backwards towards the phalanx.

With crossbows, “everyone could have a go,” to steal a quote from a documentary.

Drones are the maker community’s concept of warfighting.
Click to expand...
Yes,I`ve always considered these as the precision guided weapon equivalent of a sten gun or a panzerfaust.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom