How is it a waste when the drone is specifically built to be a kamikaze drone? It is literally its sole purpose for existing. Both Ukraine and Russia are using suicide drones right now, especially Ukraine to great effect. They occupy a different job than ordinary drones.
- HUMINT ‘It’s really the Wild West’: Vienna’s spying problem spins out of control
- Russia Narwhal ship combat module for protection against drones.
- Russia Drone "Gadfly" with homing to targets.
- Russia Testing a homemade remote control for the Kornet ATGM
- Russia Quadrosim simulator for training drone operators
Era_shield
Contributor
- Messages
- 862
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Just because something is a particular way doesn't mean it should be that way. It's wasteful to destroy the optics, battery, body and motors when it could instead deploy the destructive payload and be reused.
And no, Ukraine and Russia are both making their quadcopters drop grenades whenever possible. Self-destructing types like the Russian Lancet have wings and are effectively missiles, not quadcopters. Russia uses practically no self-destructing quadcopters. Ukraine uses a small number of them but only because the US gives them for free and Ukraine can't efficiently change them to a reusable type.
First of all, no, both sides use FPV like drones as suicide drones. Here is just a few example videos. You can find literally dozens more like these.
Secondly, you're looking at it just by the cost of the drone itself, which is the wrong way to look at any type of munition in a war. In the videos I shared above, you can see they used these FPV suicide drones to attack soldiers, different types of armored vehicles and even tanks. Drones that drop grenades have to adjust and stay still, these things are flying grenades or cluster bombs themselves, finding their targets and then attacking them at 140 km/h. Perfect for taking down targets of opportunity and great ROI when you consider how cheap these drones are. I mean, partisans even used FPV drones to successfully attack Russian A-50 awacs, one of the single most important equipment for any modern military force:
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
Third, you're wrong again, as you're thinking only of Switchblades. Ukrainians have been building their own kamikaze drones for months now:
Ukraine is raising funds to build a strike force of 1,000 exploding drones to help defeat Russia
A Ukrainian military-intelligence unit is building a fleet of "first-person-view" drones for surveillance and to carry out attacks.
www.businessinsider.com
Here is a more recent report on it:
Ukrainian company provides army with 500 FPV kamikaze drones – Minister
Ukrainian blockchain company Everstake has supplied 500 Pegas FPV "kamikaze" drones to Defense Forces, who already use those to destroy enemy targets, Deputy Prime Minister for Innovation and Minister of Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov reported on 30 May. "500 Pegasus FPV drones from the...
euromaidanpress.com
With a direct quote from a Ukrainian minister:
As I said before, these things are perfect for spotting and engaging targets of opportunity unlike drones that drop grenades which has to correct itself and stay still beforehand. Both has a place in the modern battlefield, just not the same place. Grenade/mortar dropping drones are more effective against enemy that is entrenched or otherwise staying still.
And finally, if that was the case, no military on the planet would invest in loitering munitions or kamikaze drones of any kind. But that isn't the case at all because nobody is looking at the cost of these kamikaze drones or loitering munitions like Kemankeş in isolation.
Era_shield
Contributor
- Messages
- 862
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I'm well aware of everything you just posted, and I addressed most of it in my original post. You are again confusing what is and what should be - just because Ukraine lacks the resources to make quadcopters with ballistic targeting does not mean they wouldn't if they could, or that Turkiye shouldn't.First of all, no, both sides use FPV like drones as suicide drones. Here is just a few example videos. You can find literally dozens more like these.
Secondly, you're looking at it just by the cost of the drone itself, which is the wrong way to look at any type of munition in a war. In the videos I shared above, you can see they used these FPV suicide drones to attack soldiers, different types of armored vehicles and even tanks. Drones that drop grenades have to adjust and stay still, these things are flying grenades or cluster bombs themselves, finding their targets and then attacking them at 140 km/h. Perfect for taking down targets of opportunity and great ROI when you consider how cheap these drones are. I mean, partisans even used FPV drones to successfully attack Russian A-50 awacs, one of the single most important equipment for any modern military force:
Reddit - Dive into anything
Reddit - Dive into anything
Third, you're wrong again, as you're thinking only of Switchblades. Ukrainians have been building their own kamikaze drones for months now:
Ukraine is raising funds to build a strike force of 1,000 exploding drones to help defeat Russia
A Ukrainian military-intelligence unit is building a fleet of "first-person-view" drones for surveillance and to carry out attacks.
Here is a more recent report on it:
Ukrainian company provides army with 500 FPV kamikaze drones – Minister
Ukrainian blockchain company Everstake has supplied 500 Pegas FPV "kamikaze" drones to Defense Forces, who already use those to destroy enemy targets, Deputy Prime Minister for Innovation and Minister of Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov reported on 30 May. "500 Pegasus FPV drones from the...
With a direct quote from a Ukrainian minister:
As I said before, these things are perfect for spotting and engaging targets of opportunity unlike drones that drop grenades which has to correct itself and stay still beforehand. Both has a place in the modern battlefield, just not the same place. Grenade/mortar dropping drones are more effective against enemy that is entrenched or otherwise staying still.
And finally, if that was the case, no military on the planet would invest in loitering munitions or kamikaze drones of any kind. But that isn't the case at all because nobody is looking at the cost of these kamikaze drones or loitering munitions like Kemankeş in isolation.
Btw, quadcopters that drop munitions don't have to hover or stay still. You think because that's all you've seen that that's all that's possible, but this is wrong. Kargu could (and should) be made to do an automated swooping maneuver that releases a ballistically targeted grenade/mortar that lands on a running soldier's head 100m below it. Turkiye already has the technology to do this. This would give the drone 99% the targeting effectiveness and 90% the range of an FPV drone while increasing the sortie-per-dollar and sortie-per-day rates by orders of magnitude. The only reason Ukraine isn't already doing this is that their drones are mostly commercial conversions that don't have the ability to do any kind of ballistic targeting and they haven't yet been able to develop the much more efficient type of drone I'm describing.
- Messages
- 5,206
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Tayfun
The IIR Guided ATMACA Missile fired from the BARBAROS Coastal Defense Missile System hit its target with full accuracy.
- Messages
- 5,206
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
- Messages
- 1,666
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Waov. The first time i heard about Barbaros.(or i might have forgotten)
İmpressive. here is the Mavivatan.
- Messages
- 3,671
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
- Messages
- 3,671
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
The IIR Guided ATMACA Missile fired from the BARBAROS Coastal Defense Missile System hit its target with full accuracy.
- Messages
- 1,684
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Although the Çakır and Atmaca missile families fill the gap in the medium-long range, I don't think they will cover all the layers on A2/AD concept. I mean, there can be much more diversity in coastal defense batteries. I think it is only a matter of time before the Raven emerges at short ranges and a new missile group at very long or supersonic cruise speeds.
I am almost certain that once SAGE's ramjet works reaches a certain level of maturity, we will try to utilize this technological advantage in almost every missile group.
- Messages
- 2,850
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
One point that needs a bit of clarification is the area of hypersonic missiles;
Including our Bora and Tayfun, a large number of SRBMs have a trajectory that contains a good deal of hypersonic flight. Since these missiles are ballistic or quasi ballistic missiles, they have no powered flight during their downward flight and terminal stage. They speed up under gravity (possibly to hypersonic speeds) and then after around 15000metres, as they are in denser atmospheric layers, their speed start to level off in accordance with ”terminal velocity formula” whereby the heavier and the more aerodynamic they are the higher the speed at which they hit their target. As an example a trg300 may have a 1-1.5 Mach speed, A Bora may have ~2.5 Mach, But a really heavy ICBM would have a 7 Mach speed when it hits ground.
A hypersonic missile is a missile that can fly at hypersonic speeds (+5mach) and execute multiple manoeuvres during its flight.
So missiles like Khinzal and Iskander that are classified as hypersonic may not necessarily have hypersonic speeds at their terminal stages of flight. in which case are they really hypersonic missiles?
There are 2 versions of hypersonic missiles that completely fits above definition :
HGVs : Hypersonic Glide Vehicles - These are carried to space by ballistic missiles and are released to “glide” back to earth via re-entry phase. And glide at hypersonic speeds to their targets. Russians, Chinese and U.S. are developing these.
HCMs : Hypersonic Cruise Missiles - These are missiles that are powered by an air breathing Scramjet engine to reach hypersonic speeds in atmosphere. They have scramjet propulsion until they hit their targets. Russian Zircon and Indian Brahmos-2 are good examples of these. However the 8 Mach claimed speed of zircon has not been verified, and the Indians are still developing the Brahmos-2. US and China are also in the race for hypersonic cruise missile as well as some other countries that aspire to have this weapon.
Both HGV and HCM satisfy the definition of hypersonic missiles as they have hypersonic speed all the way and they can manoeuvre.
Including our Bora and Tayfun, a large number of SRBMs have a trajectory that contains a good deal of hypersonic flight. Since these missiles are ballistic or quasi ballistic missiles, they have no powered flight during their downward flight and terminal stage. They speed up under gravity (possibly to hypersonic speeds) and then after around 15000metres, as they are in denser atmospheric layers, their speed start to level off in accordance with ”terminal velocity formula” whereby the heavier and the more aerodynamic they are the higher the speed at which they hit their target. As an example a trg300 may have a 1-1.5 Mach speed, A Bora may have ~2.5 Mach, But a really heavy ICBM would have a 7 Mach speed when it hits ground.
A hypersonic missile is a missile that can fly at hypersonic speeds (+5mach) and execute multiple manoeuvres during its flight.
So missiles like Khinzal and Iskander that are classified as hypersonic may not necessarily have hypersonic speeds at their terminal stages of flight. in which case are they really hypersonic missiles?
There are 2 versions of hypersonic missiles that completely fits above definition :
HGVs : Hypersonic Glide Vehicles - These are carried to space by ballistic missiles and are released to “glide” back to earth via re-entry phase. And glide at hypersonic speeds to their targets. Russians, Chinese and U.S. are developing these.
HCMs : Hypersonic Cruise Missiles - These are missiles that are powered by an air breathing Scramjet engine to reach hypersonic speeds in atmosphere. They have scramjet propulsion until they hit their targets. Russian Zircon and Indian Brahmos-2 are good examples of these. However the 8 Mach claimed speed of zircon has not been verified, and the Indians are still developing the Brahmos-2. US and China are also in the race for hypersonic cruise missile as well as some other countries that aspire to have this weapon.
Both HGV and HCM satisfy the definition of hypersonic missiles as they have hypersonic speed all the way and they can manoeuvre.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 5,206
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Two different image from Roketsan video
- Messages
- 1,666
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
But some (solid fueled guided rockets) surface to air missiles such as ESSM are also hypersonic. You could hit your target with hypersonic speed , if you decrease range of Tayfun, isn't it?
How use Russians s300 SAMs for ground attacks.
What would be the speed of Tayfun in 200km range?
- Messages
- 2,524
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Do we know what it is?
GBU-43
- Messages
- 1,684
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I don't think so. It's more like a demolition bomb that can create a crater with an impact radius of 1.5 kilometers. The fact that a significant amount of time is devoted to this in the Roketsan promotional video could be a message.
But then with what are we going to drop that thing? Don't tell me A400...
- Messages
- 2,524
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Doesn't look like CENK
