The drone topic

[Ivanhoe]

2 hours ago, TrustMe said:

 

I'm guessing but, as a laser I don't think a LADAR has much of a wide field of view to be much help.

For general scanning, may or may not be of use. Certainly has a "shoot me first" air to it. 

For target confirmation, tracking, and designation, could be very useful. For fewer targets, not swarms. 

[Josh]

I think APS systems that already use active radar could detect UAVs in the end game as well - typically they go to max speed, and the slower they move, the more time there is for engagement. But most detection would have to be passive EO//IR/acoustic. Not every vehicle will have a radar APS and continually running it will give away position.

there will need to be dedicated anti UAV vehicles like MSHORAD that have full spectrum capability - passive and active detection, EW, time fused canon, and short ranged missile engagement. APKWS seems more promising a counter than MANPAD type solutions. Dedicating DEW platforms likely would be better but not clear to me the technology is there yet, either for microwaves or lasers.

But another aspect is camouflage - units are going to have to get much more serious about concealing their electronic and visual signature.

[Ivanhoe]

2 hours ago, DB said:

I wonder if audio location is being attempted. Some vehicles are already fitted with shot detection, so perhaps it's an option.

It must be. There's a ton of work and fieldable systems for helo detection.

 

[TrustMe]

2 hours ago, DB said:

I wonder if audio location is being attempted. Some vehicles are already fitted with shot detection, so perhaps it's an option.

 

The new UK Ajax armoured recon vehicles are susposed to have acoustic shot detection systems.

[Burncycle360]

6 hours ago, Josh said:

I think APS systems that already use active radar could detect UAVs in the end game as well - typically they go to max speed, and the slower they move, the more time there is for engagement. But most detection would have to be passive EO//IR/acoustic. Not every vehicle will have a radar APS and continually running it will give away position.

Every vehicle does need a radar in addition to passive missile approach warning system, IMO.  That doesn't mean it has to always be running, but if your stuff starts blowing up... I think they know your position.  In high intensity conflict, active detection may be off until contact, or at least deferred to other platforms (MALE), and in less than near peer war such systems may be on all the time. They need the options, as active detection will be more reliable than passive.

A MALE UAV can also serve as a mini AWACS with Ku band radar and 2.4/5.8/1.3 ghz jammers along with other useful area assets (HEXJAM analogues).  Then your MALE can emit instead of your ground forces to detect the presence of drones, and flood broadcast encrypted datalink information to the BMS on the ground.  Threat ELINT will detect the radar, but direction finding a MALE doesn't help them with regards to disposition and distribution of ground forces.   If they get shot down, kill whatever shot it down and send another one up. Your ground forces commander then has some options:

1. If the MALE is detecting drones that are getting too close and his forces are well concealed, he may permit area defense systems to activate in order to address the drones where possible, as well as allowing individual units to engage when appropriate, using their passive detection and tracking systems.

2. If it's likely that the drone will spot individual positions, he may opt instead for individual units to go active with their APS radar.

3. If it's a convoy going through potentially unfriendly territory, area defenses will be emitting, but will be inadequate on their own due to coverage limitations. In such cases, one presumes the enemy knows where you are and individual vehicles will be actively emitting, not just for drone threats but also ATGM and RPG.

Regional jamming by larger dedicated USAF/USN jamming assets (particularly directional aerial jamming) can do a lot to frustrate ELINT assets too -- it allows a curtain behind which your forces can actively emit with their APS without risk of revealing their disposition because anyone listening for APS frequencies behind their FLOT will see it everywhere and much louder than the actual APS.  This needs to happen anyway for a variety of reasons, such as rendering their counter-battery radars unable to function effectively.

Such ancillary things are less heralded, but they make the difference between an imposing military on paper, and functional one in reality. They aren't optional if one is to be a first world military.

Edited June 8 by Burncycle360

[Josh]

At some point, defense gets so expensive that it is not cost effective. Every vehicle having its own SAM system is simply not practical. At some point you need to accept losses and focus on offense against the UAV kill chain: the larger platforms that provide area ISR and launchers and control teams themselves, and any logistics you can manage to track further back. Making an impenetrable defense on a per vehicle basis is a recipe for disaster. I expect most future AFVs will have target recognition algorithms and even automated gun engagement options - that probably does not require a lot of expense in terms of EO/IR sensors and processing time. Primary or secondary armament in the 30-50mm range can be the engagement method. All of that would be fairly off the shelf usage; you would want all of that just for a leg up in ground target engagement. Dedicated systems rapidly get impractically expensive unless mounted on a dedicated escort anti UAV vehicle.

[Burncycle360]

Quote

Every vehicle having its own SAM system is simply not practical.

For most countries I'd agree it is cost prohibitive currently, given the current state of their military and military spending, but it doesn't mean it isn't going to be necessary.

A remote weapons station capable of killing a DJI class drone (including small fiber optic suicide drones), along with a dispenser with interceptor drones to kill many of these things simultaneously are going to be the two baseline anti-drone hard kill systems going forward, and they WILL require some reliable means of detection and cueing, and that's going to involve an APS like radar and staring EO based MAWS.  That's just he way it is.  There is nothing else that can replace this requirement.  Area defense assets are not adequate.  It's going to be as important as windshield wipers on a car, and thermals on a tank.  The only option is to figure out how to pay for it.
 

Edited June 8 by Burncycle360

[bojan]

Layered AD, something US fails to understand since... Always?

1 - Individual APS/automated RWS on individual vehicles ас final layer vs whatever passes through higher layers.

2 - Co level with possibly 30x113mm cannon in lightweight mount and (possibly modified) MANPADS vs light recce and heavier "bomber" drones

3 - Bn level, larger caliber gun + light SAM vs larger recce drones and low end armed ones.

4 - Bde Level vs MALE drones. This will need to have own "anti-FPV (same as "Co level" probably), because AD is primary target for longer range FPVs also.

+ jammers, because not all drones are nore can be cable guided.

You can not have "one sollution", threat is way to varried for that.

If you rely only on 1 you are going to get swarmed and killed, no matter how capable is your self-protection system.

[Burncycle360]

No one is suggesting we not have a layered system.

 

Edited June 8 by Burncycle360

[futon]

For very close range anti-drone weapons, laser will probably be best. At close range, things like atmospheric dampening effect to lasers is mostly not at play. Detection and identification if hostile or not is easier at close range.

Kenetic and explosive defenses poses a risk to nearby friendlies, laaer is much less likely. 

Laser system itself would be expensive but laser use is cheap. Kenetics and explosives is more expensive, especially in relation to the cost of the drone.

From the looks of current 10kW, looks to be a bit slow in downing obseraving drones. Probobly needs to 15kW to knock out kamikaze drones quickly enough so that small masses can't be overwhelming.

Maybe attach a platoon of anti-drone laser mobile units to each company of vehicles. 

Leave the APS to anti-tank missiles

[Burncycle360]

This is "very close range"

Lasers simply do not have the dwell time to reliably kill a drone here much less multiple in close succession.   APS, sure.  A very fast slewing RWS with airburst munitions, probably. Drone interceptors, unlikely  (too close unless detected coming down the street)

A fiber optic guided drone, downed by whatever means, may detonate as it falls out of the sky and impacts the ground as a lot of these in Ukraine have simple trigger mechanisms. Therefore, life for close supporting infantry will be risky even in your hypothetical, however without counter-drone measures a detonating tank is hazardous to nearby infantry too.

To be clear, when I say an APS is required, I mean specifically to cue the remote weapon station and drone interceptors.  I would prefer that the hard kill component of the APS is reserved for RPG/ATGM threats, but of course it will work as a backstop against drones that do get through drone defenses.






 

 

Edited June 9 by Burncycle360

[Stuart Galbraith]

The Hoffmans are gonna be pissed...

 

[Ivanhoe]

12 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

The Hoffmans are gonna be pissed...

 

"You may not be interested in drones, but drones are interested in you."

[Dawes]

The RAAF seem to be making strides with drones. Was not aware that Ghost Bats were armed.

"This latest capability demonstration conducted at Woomera involved a single operator aboard an airborne E-7A Wedgetail taking control of two Ghost Bat aircraft to conduct a mission against an airborne target."

https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/media-releases/2025-06-16/key-milestone-development-australian-made-combat-drone

Edited June 17 by Dawes

[Stuart Galbraith]

I get warm shivvers everytime 'Woomera' is said. Its like the Empire is still a thing

 

[Ivanhoe]

At this point in history, its hard to take the RAAF seriously given they haven't fielded a drone design called the Drop Bear. 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Be fair, they already have a chemical weapon programme underway. Its called Fosters.

[DB]

Some mildly interesting stuff out of the Paris Air Show. Obviously everyone is trying to get a share of the drone market.

Reuters article gives a summary, broad brush mentioning the wingmen concepts, Ghost Bat and what we consider to be more,dare I say it, traditional drones. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/drone-makers-battle-air-dominance-with-wingman-aircraft-2025-06-19/

Not mentioned there is the MBDA OWE, RCX 50 and RCH 170 concepts.

SAAB's uncrewed AEW platform is going to sell well, given the death of the E.7.

[Stuart Galbraith]

I wouldnt be surprised if we take that for AEW, not just for the Carriers but for UK airspace as well.

[Josh]

On 6/17/2025 at 1:24 PM, Dawes said:

The RAAF seem to be making strides with drones. Was not aware that Ghost Bats were armed.

"This latest capability demonstration conducted at Woomera involved a single operator aboard an airborne E-7A Wedgetail taking control of two Ghost Bat aircraft to conduct a mission against an airborne target."

https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/media-releases/2025-06-16/key-milestone-development-australian-made-combat-drone

The Q-28s need not be armed to undertake a mission against an airborne target, especially in an exercise. AFAIK they have not been seen with any ordnance attached.

Edited June 20 by Josh

[Dawes]

So...ramming speed?

[Josh]

ISR/EW, or for exercise purposes, just simulated missile engagements.

[lucklucky]

Farmer drone rescue 2 kids in floods.

Edited July 6 by lucklucky

[DB]

Nice improvisation. This will become commonplace, and it won't be long either.

[sunday]

5 minutes ago, DB said:

Nice improvisation. This will become commonplace, and it won't be long either.

Until government tries to regulate it, claiming those drones are not approved for transporting humans.