Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Stoyfan t1_j6k5dnv wrote

Reply to comment by chriswaco in Mass-market military drones have changed the way wars are fought by ChickenTeriyakiBoy1

>I see a future where one party launches 10,000 kamikaze drones (whether anti-personnel, high explosive, or incendiary) to start or end a war.

It would be a mistake to think that in the future there will be no way to counter this threat.

Every time when something as goundbreaking as small drones, or tanks, or jets appear on the battlefield, militaries will find ways to counter these new threats.

In the case of tanks, they way we countered that was with anti-tank guns/rifles. In the case of jets it was anti air missiles. In the case of drones, it be jamming, self propelled anti air guns and lasers (not available at the moment but work is being done right now).

7

chriswaco t1_j6k7lyq wrote

Yeah, it's always a contest to stay ahead. Armor led to anti-tank weapons which led to ablative armor which led to molten warheads which lead to reactive armor, etc, etc. I remember when I first heard about reactive armor and couldn't decide if it was brilliant or idiotic.

You can block GPS easily enough, although motion sensors can help guide a drone too. You can have IR cameras but your targets can shoot IR light into the sky to mislead the drones. I'm not sure if you can send enough raw EM radiation into the sky to disable cheap drones - wouldn't surprise me.

It might work once, like the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, but never again.

8

PrincessElonMusk t1_j6nhkip wrote

The challenge with blanketing an area with enough EM to interfere with all possible drones 24x7 is that you risk degrading your own capabilities that require use of EM frequencies.

2