/k/ - Weapons, Combat, Outdoorsmanship

wepon

SAVE THIS FILE: Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.0 (updated 2021-01-10)

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 5120

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Captcha
no cookies?
Board Rules
More

(used to delete files and postings)


what's a war board without a conflict?


Drone threa(t/d) Strelok 12/03/2020 (Thu) 08:52:13 No.10106
What are your thoughts about drones/UAVs in general, anon? They're becoming increasingly common nowadays, terrorists have even used Quadrocopter drones to remotely bomb targets. What could a potential insurgent/resistance fighter use them for? Do you have ideas on how to utilize them, as weapons, reconnaissance or delivery vehicles? Or something else entirely? I'm genuinely interested in knowing what an inventive fighter could use these for >Inb4 datamining thread
Open file (218.00 KB 880x480 drone swarm.jpg)
DRONE SWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARM
>>10106 >What are your thoughts about drones/UAVs in general, anon? I think drones are pretty cool and are also are going to become an even bigger part of militaries/paramilitaries. A recent example of the power of drones and loitering Munitions was seen in the Nagorno-Karabakh war where the drone program that Azerbaijan had was able to just completely fuck the Armenians. Didn't help that the Armenian's seemed to have no AA support whatsoever Not only the firepower of drones but also the capability to get very accurate recon data for artillery and ground units quickly is a massive advantage when the enemy seemingly can't stop you from putting drones in the sky. Another aspect is psychological, when the enemy can have unmanned suicide drones over your head at any moment that must cause mass paranoia among troops. Hell ISIS has been using suicide drones for quite awhile now and before Russia was backing the SAA and pushed them into obscurity within Syria ISIS was absolutely raping the SAA. ISIS was not trained and armed by Israel or America this message brought to you by the good people of the CIA™ and IDF™ >>10107 Drone swarms taking out helicopters and jets when?
>>10106 >Inb4 datamining thread < Fed datamining thread confirmed. You can't inb4 in the OP, dumbass.
>>10112 >datamining The government wants to know my stance on drones?
>>10109 >when the enemy seemingly can't stop you from putting drones in the sky. Rifle MANPADs soon?
I still think this: >>9458 >>9630
https://archive.is/9vUYU Russia Successfully Carries Out Test Flights Of S-70 Okhotnik-B Heavy Attack Drone In Fighter-Intercepter Mode >For the first time, the Russian military conducted a series of flights of the S-70 Okhotnik-B heavy attack UAV in its mode of operation as a fighter-interceptor with simulated air-to-air missiles at the Ashuluk training ground, an unnamed source in the military-industrial complex told RIA Novosti. >Prior to this, the S-70 Okhotnik-B heavy attack drone had already performed a number of flights, but during them only its flight qualities and the operation of the main on-board systems were assessed. >“From the strip of the military airfield of the Center for Combat Training and Combat Use of the Russian Aerospace Forces at the Ashuluk training ground, several flights of the Hunter were performed with functional simulators of guided air-to-air missiles. Such missiles in the combat version are designed to destroy other aircraft,” the source told RIA, noting that the tests were recent. >The source explained that the flights performed “will make it possible to assess the coupling of the drone’s avionics with missile guidance systems and the lead Su-57 aircraft.” >According to RIA’s source, simulators of missiles with infrared and radar homing heads were used on the S-70 Okhotnik-B heavy attack drone. >“The simulators have the body and all the electronic stuffing of the corresponding missile, but they lack the engine and warhead,” the source said. >The S-70 Okhotnik-B, developed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau, is to become the first heavy drone with strike functions in the Russian Aerospace Forces. The device is made according to the “flying wing” scheme with the use of materials that reduce the radar signature. >According to open sources, the strike UAV has a length of 19 meters, a wingspan of 14 meters, its take-off weight is 20 tons, and its maximum speed is about 1000 kilometers per hour. The first flight of the Hunter took place on August 3 and lasted more than 20 minutes. >There is newly-released footage, but below is the only one released so far showing a flight of the heavy attack drone.
>>10120 Pretty impressive looking. I wonder how the development/production funding for the thing will work out in the end?
Open file (42.91 KB 319x960 Plane.jpg)
takes the honor out of warfare, no more seeing the fear in the enemy's eyes when you can just oush a button on the other side of the world and end their free trial on life, i.e. soleimani. although in a hundred years they'll become completely necessary to any military just like the first firearms were a few hundred years ago. they'll be used to wipe out any dissenters against the gubmint under the pretext that "their house had a gas leak bro i swear" this is stretching it but nothing surprises me anymore
>>10124 >takes the honor out of warfare well, since WW1 at the latest the vast majority of soldiers are killed by distance weapons, mainly artillery and bombs, add machine guns and mines to that, I doubt there's much honor left to lose.
>>10124 >Takes the honor out of warfare Every weapon system ever developed is just an extension of the will of the man who wants to destroy his enemy. Honor is towards your own people not some people whom you should step on as if they were no more than bugs because they would think the same of you and yours and would wish to do so sooner. Drones are a different weapon that we just haven't adapted too as a whole for us to see them more as guardian angels. I've been meaning to make diy RC into a hobby of mine that I'm sure I could tie into SIGINT somehow this month. Just wish I knew someone who could help mr in person.
>>10124 Takes the honor out of warfare like >>10128 says honor as been absent in warfare in a long time. I realize It is necessary for me to define what honor is in this discussion but I do not the capacity to do so. The fascist obsession with aviation barring the idea of futurism that come from dominating the sky stems from the fact that an air duel was honorable. A chivalrous duel of wits, skill and bravery not too unlike to a knightly joust of old, and very much in constrast to the ruthless meat grinder that was ground combat. >>10125 This. The Geneva Convection, chivalry and the honorable treatment of the enemy has been a purely Intra- European phenomena. This is because Europeans recognized each other as the same people and of the same faith even when waring. It is in this manner most of their fights where fought: conflicts became increasingly civil, efficient and merciful. Think of it not unlike a duel among piers; in which the saber clash, a victor distinguishes himself but no life is taken- If it were to between foes, there would be blood. It is only the so-called "enlightened" modern man who fool-heartily extends this treatment to, and conflates these generosity as universal, to the foe whom expects no quarter and give non in return. This has been done before, as emblemized by the razzing of Carthage. Throughout both Punic Wars, the Carthaginians showed a non-reciprocal mercy to Romans. And return they got only total war.
>>10137 sorry for the accidental reddit spacing, this is unreadable
>>10120 Well that's bit disturbing, although completely expected. I cannot help but to wonder wethever or not most of the surface vessels of navies have been made just outright obsolete with the combination of various unmanned systems. Well, obsolete in the terms of ships not having sufficient protection against aerial and submerged loitering ammunitions.
>>10124 This is interesting. If drones really become such an important asset in the war against dissenters, how could someone defend themselves against such a threat? Surely these UAVs will be equipped with state of the art electronics, so we could, at the very least, expect thermal imaging combined with high resolution cameras. Is there something today, that can be used to counter an unmanned aerial threat? Except actively shooting those shits down. It should be something one could setup/improvise without access to military hardware, so I guess no high powered jamming arrays :/
>>10174 Just make sure you're well-sighted and lead properly Anon. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvClpuFmfm0
https://archive.is/5PwTc Russia unveils new drone killer >The machine will create a shield from a hail of projectiles that burst with shrapnel in the air, forming an impenetrable barrier against enemy drones. >In the coming years, the new Derivatsiya-PVO self-propelled anti-aircraft gun will join the ranks of the Russian military. >It is based on the BPM-3 infantry fighting vehicle and the AU-220M automatic weapon station, which fires up to 120 large-caliber artillery shells per minute. >“Its ammunition kit includes remotely detonated and guided projectiles, which means that anti-aircraft gunners can fire a shell and detonate it with a single keystroke during the flight, or adjust its path to track the enemy's movements,” a source in the Russian military-industrial complex told Russia Beyond, who wished to remain anonymous. >Moreover, it is tailored for small-size targets flying at an altitude of several hundred meters. >“Drones have become the scourge of our army in the Middle East, and not only ours. Militants make remote-controlled ‘helicopters’ from improvised means, attach bombs to them, then dispatch a whole flock of ‘suicide bombers’ to blow up expensive air-defense systems or tanks and helicopters. Basically, any equipment that costs millions of dollars,” said the expert. >In response, he says, the army is forced to shoot down dime-a-dozen drones with multimillion-dollar missiles, since there is no cheap-and-easy system in service capable of resisting a swarm of drones. "It is to save money and equipment on destroying these buzzing bomb-laden irritants that Derivatsiya is being developed," he added. >With a firing rate of 120 rounds per minute, Derivatsiya is capable of launching a whole row of projectiles and instantly detonating them, whereupon the cloud of fragmentation debris wipes out any incoming drones from the sky. >In terms of range, Derivatsiya is comparable to NATO's laser-guided UMTAS anti-tank missiles, as well as the Roketsan MAM-C and MAM-L smart munition systems, used by the Turkish Air Force in the Middle East. >One particular feature of Derivatsiya’s AU-220M cannon is its modularity. Put simply, it can be installed both on heavy equipment, in the form of multi-ton caterpillar-track platforms or ships, as well as on BRM-3 infantry fighting vehicles or BRM-3K reconnaissance vehicles. >“There also exists a version of the AU-220M for transport aircraft. This transforms the Il-76 or An-12, in terms of combat power, into the equivalent of the US C-130 Hercules. For military transporters, the AU-200M is made in 30 and 105-mm calibers,” said Russia Beyond’s source. But surely geriatric NATO planners will be too enlightened to put scaled down CIWS on german tankettes or random pickup trucks, the future lies in stealth and muhssiles after all not antiquated anti-air guns from the fascist dark ages.
Open file (193.15 KB 621x1133 AU220M_BAIKAL.JPG)
>>10508 It's quite fantastic that they can write all of this and only repeat the RoF without anything else. The AU-220M is a turret with a 57mm AA gun, and so they made some smart ammunition for it. That's a simple and effective method, jut what you would expect from the Russkies. >scaled down CIWS on german tankettes or random pickup trucks If you were to scale them down you'd end up with a radar-guided minigun, and that's quite less effective overall than a high-calibre autocannon with an exploding shell.
>>10508 > my sides. Had Armenia had the sense to stay in the war they could be shooting down Arezi drones while fighting an effective defense in their snow covered mountains now. Not saying they could have won it. But at least Armenia could have got a better negotiated settlement if they had stuck it out than what they got and deserved Like everything else in that war the Leadership made the worst call to pull out when they did.
>>10521 Not really, the damage was already done, if the conflict had started later then maybe they would have had a chance.
Open file (91.76 KB 1020x573 1-5228623.jpeg.jpg)
Flamethrower equipped drone incinerates wasp nests in Chinese village for "humanitarian efforts." https://archive.is/fRo4O https://www.foxnews.com/world/china-flamethrower-drone-burns-wasp-nests
>>10787 Cool AF. Where can I get one, Alibaba?
>>10796 >They raised 80,000 yuan ($12,200) to buy a drone and equip it with a gasoline tank and an arm-length nozzle Yes.
Open file (29.33 KB 479x388 azeri_drones.png)
Open file (647.03 KB 1000x1481 TAI-Anka.jpg)
Open file (155.93 KB 1000x1269 IAI-Harop.jpg)
Open file (2.62 MB 3634x2057 tb2 uav team.jpg)
Crossposting from the Artsakh thread: https://archive.vn/xEre3 https://archive.vn/eeTxP These articles say that drone swarm tactics are the hot new wave of warfare, henceforth turkroaches and kikes are leading the way. >What happened to Armenia was not an isolated moment in military history, but rather the culmination of a new kind of warfare, centered on the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs, or drones). Azerbaijan’s major ally in the war against Armenia – Turkey – has been perfecting the art of drone warfare for years, with extensive experience in full-scale modern conflict gained in recent fighting in Syria (February-March 2020) and Libya (May-June 2020.) >Azerbaijan’s drones roamed free because Armenia had no jammer able to interrupt the signals linking the drones to their guidance stations. Only in the last days of the war did Russia use the Krasukha electronic warfare system based at the Armenian city of Gyumri to interdict Azeri deep reconnaissance in Armenia proper. Still, the Azeris also used the Israeli Harop loitering munition, which was able to work under adverse conditions (although at reduced effectiveness) as it does not, unlike drones. require a guidance link. Hence among armies that are likely to prepare to fight wars in the future – not only the US, China, Russia but regional powers such as Turkey, Israel, and South Africa – this experience will certainly prompt further research into artificial intelligence and autonomous lethal weapons systems. Rather than banning this class of ammunition by a prohibitive arms control treaty, as envisioned by Europe, they will experiment with how to make use of the new technologies and best integrate autonomous lethal weapons systems into their combined-arms manoeuvre forces, thereby increasing their operational tempo and effectiveness. >Before the war, on a tactical level the Armenian army was superior: it had better officers, more motivated soldiers, and a more agile leadership. In all previous wars with Azerbaijan, this proved to be decisive. But Azerbaijan found a way to work around it. This is where the drones came in: they allowed the Azeris to reconnoitre first the Armenian position and then the placement of reserves. Armenian positions then could be extensively shelled with conventional artillery, weakening their defences. Drones then guided the onslaught towards the Armenian reserves, bringing in artillery, multiple-rocket systems with cluster munitions, their own missiles, or using Israeli-made LORA ballistic missiles to destroy bridges or roads linking the reserves with the front. Once the Armenian side was incapable of sending reserves into battle, the Azeri army could move in any number it wished to overwhelm the isolated Armenian positions. This procedure was repeated day after day, chipping one Armenian position away each day and resupplying artillery during the night.
I could see them being used to great effect for asymmetric warfare, like have a bunch of cheap ones with small bombs attached just waiting for a convoy to drive down a city street and all at once send them flying at weak points of the vehicles, or at least attacking the windshields and make driving a huge slow pain in the ass so you can come around with a follow up attack.
I'm not huge into drones, but I have one I use for taking photos of houses for real estate purposes. They're remarkably easy to fly, but they're kind of pissy to use because everything has to be charged, there can't be any flying restrictions in the area, and the weather has to be nice for you to actually fly the thing and get photos. They're also really loud, everyone will know there's a drone coming from quite some while away, and the battery life and range also isn't too good. So in the case some terrorist were to use one to attack us, you'd be able to narrow down the range to they were physically in to a pretty short distance, and with a decent amount of cameras or even microphones on the streets you'd be able to check who heard it first. tl;dr less dumb than suicide bombing, but kind of expensive, loud, and the range isn't great8d4199
>>11203 I was thinking more like having them on standby just on the ground and then springing them with a shorter ranged ambush that would be followed up with a full on attack during the resulting confusion, but this has also probably already been considered by the military and are also probably already developing a ridiculously overpriced countermeasure.
>>11208 Considering that CIWS systems (which are fucking awesome) can shoot literal mortar shells and missiles out of the sky I don't think a slow drone is going to be any difficulty.
>>11208 >but this has also probably already been considered by the military and are also probably already developing a ridiculously overpriced countermeasure. The US Army's official response to questions of battlefield drone proliferation at a defense industry trade meet back in 2018 amounted to "you realize we still have roughly 800 perfectly good Vulcans in storage even if we can't get enough Centurions out in time, right?" That's probably the primary reason why the US Army isn't really concerned about drones, neither deploying them in mass nor countering them. The overabundance of effective countermeasures which already exist.
>>11229 I'm talking about flying drones out of a nearby building or rooftop in an ambush preceding a full on firefight, not from a mortar position half a fucking mile away of course they'd see that coming. I'm talking like they're sitting there on the floor with bombs strapped to them and you're just out of sight, when the convoy gets to the perfect spot you send the drones on their way to fuck with the front and rear vehicles. Like a swarm of drones. It'd be too expensive probably but it's pretty entertaining to think about.
>>11231 >The overabundance of effective countermeasures which already exist. Do we have enough BULLETS?
>>11250 >enough BULLETS What kinda retard thinks there will ever be enough bullets? You get all the bullets then you make more and keep making more.
>>11250 This brings up a good point. How does a militia/rebel/chronically-underfunded-group-of-your-choice defend against drones? My understanding is that old school AA relied on saturation of the airspace around the aircraft. Can anti-air be brought down to the level of Billy-Bob and Uncle Fred? Does a fire team now have another automatic rifleman that just does AA, or do would we have to have a stand-off team using recycled marine radar and shotguns? Would a time delay with a charge inside of a waxed birdshot slug work to get projectiles far enough out? If not, could 22lr be used?
I've been following the development of drones for some time. The Israelis forged ahead using drones to drop mortars, which became viable due to the weight of the drone being relative to a mortar tube, and the minimum range issues of mortars. Inevitably we will se recon tasks carried out by drones, like infantry establishing security perimeters and laser designating targets. We may also see drones used for breaching, where a hand grenade drone enters and if it is destroyed the assumption is made there is a combatant inside and the drone explodes. All this allows wealthy nations to reduce human casualties in COIN type operations, allowing them to basically occupy more places at once What I am really afraid of is that someone will use drones in combination with toxic gas, removing a human operator here is of obvious advantage, the airbourne dispersal would be devastating and the low weight/lethality ratio of gas also favors drones. I imagine that an autonomous armored vehicle would cart these drones into position, and they would launch to form a wind-adjusting perimeter to disperse. In an urban area it would be devastating, destroying the drones would only limit the dispersion and they could navigate stairs and enter closed spaces through roofs and windows.
>>10174 >Is there something today, that can be used to counter an unmanned aerial threat? DIY spark gap jammers wreck all electromagnetic transmissions in the area of effect. But you need to build lots because theyre very easy to triangulate.
>>11203 Instead of the helicopter-style ones that are now fashionable, someone could build something like a remote-pilot model plane and strap a cheap camera with a radio link or something to it. Some of those can take a bit of weight, maybe 20kg if you make one big enough, and they run from a small petrol or kerosene engine, if you are a machinist you could build one quite easily. >>11623 Machine-gun on an AA tripod mount? You would need portable AA radars though. Someone would know how to make one.
>control f Houthis/Yemen >no results Unfortunately we don't have the complete picture of the drone efforts there. But I think that war is huge in how it shows how drones can be used against even a "modern" army with relative success.
>>12081 The Houthis are a poor example, because the facts of the matter have not been sufficiently established. The global Jew tells us the Houthis were responsible because the drones launched against Saudi came from Houthi territory- but this is an assumption. Also is assumed that the Iranians armed the Houthis, because the drones were as Iranian drones- again this is an assumption. Thus with the context not sufficiently established, the effectiveness of the drone strikes is unknowable. Did whoever launched the drones have insider knowledge of Saudi defenses/lack of. Were the drones recovered the principal cause of the damage, or was there some other cause beside the drones? Were there more advanced drones or some other munition mixed in? I would say however, that the ability to conceal a drone launch point combined with the flight range of a drone makes it very difficult to position defences- a weak force may with a single drone force an enemy to invest in many defences
Can small swarming suicide drones with a short flight time (>10 minutes) dumped from an airborne autonomous carrier be considered a type of cluster munition?
>>12449 Legally or objectively? Because I don't see why would it be a cluster munition, it's more akin to releasing a bunch of bombs at the same time.
>>12058 That's basically what a UAV is. Those are also extremely illegal to own in first world countries because they are seen as "terrorist devices/devices of war", anon.
Does Strelo/k/ have a decent DIY drone guide? I understand the basics and could build one in my garage without resorting to clearnet kit purchases, but I'm trying to write a handbook similar to the Anarchist Cookbook but with modern (and correct) information as a sort of "big tent" alt-right handbook covering turning flagpoles at rallies into mortars, building a DIY drone that can handle larger "deliveries" than the standard models, what medicines are safe/how to synthesize them at home, and other fun projects now that believing the government should be smaller is equivalent to domestic terrorism.
>>12456 >Those are also extremely illegal to own in first world countries Yet there's such things as aeromodelling clubs. I know that there's people who build miniature functional jet engines for such airplanes (without using them for illegal acts of course). If someone invaded your country, those people's skills could be put to good use...
>>12456 Glownigger detected, you fool no one you fucking gay fag KYS.
>>12479 Yes and those groups typically have FAA licensing in some form or another. >>12484 Anon, it's illegal to own a drone above a certain size without registering it in America. I doubt they'd approve the registration on a plane-type drone that functions at much greater altitudes since the whole point of registration is to keep people from owning things that can deliver a payload. Aeronautical groups that have all their little ducks in a row (and likely either a licensed engineer on the project or a lawyer or military funding) are exceptions to the rule.
>>12485 >I doubt they'd approve the registration on a plane-type drone that functions at much greater altitudes since the whole point of registration is to keep people from owning things that can deliver a payload. >things that can deliver a payload. How do R/C plane autists get stuff like https://invidious.snopyta.org/watch?v=hn2c52yM0K0 airborne then without getting Red Flag'd in the process then?
>>12487 >snopyta To this day across several platforms and several browsers, I have never gotten one of those videos to ever load for me, but that aside, RC planes generally have a different build than a standard drone that gets them classified as a recreational/hobby device sort of the same way there's modifications you can make to a firearm to effectively bypass ATF regulations. Being unable to watch your video, I'm unable to confirm past that speculation for how they either complied to what I said above or what I've said now. The FAA is about as strict with drones as the ATF is with firearms, and drones are still an emerging field so the definitions could change at any time.
Open file (64.61 KB 414x248 rumia.png)
>>12496 https://archive.is/aDaCf >drones have to be marked >observers required >loicense required >drone registration required >can't fly above 120m >can legally carry a payload if the drone stays within the 25kg weight limit The regulation doesn't seem to discriminate based on aircraft type/build, it defines a Small Unmanned Aircraft System as any plane with sub-25kg takeoff weight and explicitly allows the transportation of property with the drone why haven't Fed false flaggers used that to further harden drone and gun regulations? The 25kg weight limit is rather generous if one desired to convert their RC plane into a flying kebab van in Simpleplanes, and registration won't amount to much if the player neither intends to stay on the server nor has had any beef with the admins beforehand. Gotta say I miss the times of YT madlads in 2008 getting EasyStars to 500m in stormy snowy weather then accidentally a rough landing on some abandonded coal funnels leading to an adventurous journey to recover their plane as then-voluntary markings tended to consist of email addresses scribbled on the fuselage with GPS/observers seldomly being present. In regards to invidious, does pasting the link into mpv not werk on your end? In-browser video looks like shit in comparison, they don't even have simple deblocking filters despite being so large.
How well would a radar-guided 14.5mm machine gun perform at removing drones? I'm thinking about a remote weapon station that can handle these small handheld drones and maybe some bigger ones too. The 14.5mm projectile itself it too small to carry significant amount of explosives, and the case is about the size of a 20mm autocannon shell (they even necked it out to 23mm for autocannons), so installing a proximity fuse is not an option. But if you go for an autocannon with guided shells that have proximity fuses, then you might as well leave the 20-25mm range and go bigger to improve the bang-to-buck ratio. But then we are speaking about something that is too big to be installed into a remote weapon station and instead it should be in the turret of an IFV or a tank. Meanwhile the 14.5mm machine gun is just about the upper limit of what you can put to the top of a turret or a truck's cabin, and the projectile is stupid fast with 1000m/s muzzle velocity, and there is even a discarding sabot boolit that ups it to 1250m/s. So in theory it should be able to hit a drone that is within 1-2km, but the target itself is stupid small and you might need a burst of 3-5 shots, and that's when the size problem becomes apparent. Alternatively you could use a .50 BMG machine gun, because with SLAP the muzzle velocity is 1220m/s, and the cartridge is obviously smaller. But we need accuracy so that we can reduce the number of rounds fired. But then there are the problems of drone swarms, and you should obviously use something that can put up a barrage. But whatever that weapon might be, this heavy machine gun is meant to deal with individual drones cheaply and reliably, so the two system's duties shouldn't overlap.
>>13826 If we're talking small drones at 1-2km, how much explosives are actually nessessary? Could a 7.62 round be enough? Could a prox fuse be miniaturized to fit 308?
>>13828 Explosives are only needed to create a cloud of fragments, and for such small and unarmoured targets there shouldn't be that much difference between being hit by a 7.62 projectile or a fragment that has roughly equivalent energy. In fact, you could go significantly lower. But that cloud can have hundreds of fragments, which obviously increase the hit chance quite a bit.
Could nigger rigged guided fireworks similar in principle to the type 3 shell used by the Japanese in WW2 function as an AA solution against large swarms of small drones? With the goal of damaging drone sensors for easy follow up shots by improvised AA guns.
>>13837 That reminds me, could that crazy incendiary balloon plan the Japanese cooked up during WW2 work in the modern day with telecommunications and drone technology?
>>13837 they have to explode near the drones in order to be effective, so the propellant needs to be adjustable, or you need some kind of proximity-detonator on the fireworks. Other than that, yeah, probably.
I could write at length, but more than 4 years ago I predicted the rise of drones, it's happening much slower than I thought but it is happening
>>13898 You want to clear out drones? Well the good news is that drones are expensive; but they are rapidly falling in price. I really have been giving this some thought, because it's far more likely these drones will be used by police in wealthy countries or by occupying forces (Jews) than on the battlefield where their cost effectiveness is low. Strangely enough it's more akin to taking out tanks than anything else. >deny intelligence( COINTEL) >deny deployment >deny strategic position/area denial >deny targets >deny target acquisition >deny weapon systems >deny optics >deny mobility (so you can retreat/ regain position ) >deny coms (on the basis that it hinders re-deployment- but you probably die) Before you even think about anything really clever, consider the basics.
Have there been any advances in sentry guns as of late? They and UAVs should go hand in hand.
>>13826 >But if you go for an autocannon with guided shells that have proximity fuses, then you might as well leave the 20-25mm range and go bigger to improve the bang-to-buck ratio. Or maybe we can ignore that ratio in favour of a reasonably light and compact autocannon whose primary job is to remove drones with HE shells that have programmable fuses. You could still use it against ground targets if you want to, but that shouldn't be a priority. For this purpose something like this 27mm gun could work, or maybe a simpler design with a lower RoF that is chambered for the same cartridge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauser_BK-27 http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_27mm-145_mlg27.php Speaking of that, it seems like the case is based on a soviet one: https://www.quarryhs.co.uk/MilRel.htm >The first two cartridges share 23x152B dimensions but are made of different materials and have other differences in primers and loadings. The first was used in the WW2 era VYa aircraft cannon mainly fitted to the II 2 Shturmovik ground attack plane ; these all had brass cases. In the 1950s the cartridge was worked on for the faster-firing ZU series of anti-aircraft guns, the case material being changed to steel. Four of the guns were used in the ZSU Shilka self-propelled AA system. Some towed and naval AA guns remain in service today, and a version is also used in light AFVs. However, brass-cased ammunition (like the one shown) remained in production for a long time, for use in sub-calibre tank gun training devices. >There is no claim of a direct relationship between these and the other two, but they are so similar in case design that it makes one wonder… >The 27x145B for the Mauser BK 27 revolver cannon was designed specifically for the Panavia Tornado strike fighter, although it is also used in Germany's version of the Alpha Jet, in the SAAB Gripen, and the Eurofighter Typhoon. A four-barrel naval CIWS mount (the Mauser Drakon) was developed but not used, but the MLG 27, a remote-control single-barrel mounting, has been adopted by the German navy, is attracting export sales, and is now being offered in a land mounting.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms
Delete
Report

Captcha (required for reports)

no cookies?