Latest Thread
Are we sure that is the case? Or is it a case of public not seeing a video of what it actually did? Kargu also have autonomous navigation as far as I can remember.The drone was used on many occasions in both Karabakh and Syria and rarely secured a kill.
Kargu has many advanced functions for its size and purpose which are making the price higher. Maybe even too much.Are we sure that is the case? Or is it a case of public not seeing a video of what it actually did? Kargu also have autonomous navigation as far as I can remember.
Kargu has many advanced functions for its size and purpose which are making the price higher. Maybe even too much.
Multiple independent sources report on the lack of effect on target. In many cases it was supported with visual evidence showing the drone almost intact after the explosion and this show the low effect.
Many people would argue that the warhead is designed to kill with the help of shrapnel but unfortunately this is not the case we see on the field. Most of the targets sustain light injuries. Unfortunately the system even has the nickname "Cata Pat" among the analyzers closely following the developments regarding the Turkish military operations abroad.
I am wondering about the state of development because Kargu has big potential but changes are needed especially when it comes to the weak warhead.
I know how the warhead of the drone works. The problem is not in the directional warhead, if it is direct impact or not. The problem is the weak warhead that can't even lead to a good level of disintegration of a couple plastic parts.A few observations which largely nullifies your post.
The warhead of Kargu is creating a direction explosion away from the drone. Additionally the explosion often happens at a distance to the target and not on direct impact. These factors leads to the drone itself sustaining damage but not complete destruction.
In many instances the drone has also killed enemies. However, I agree, a bigger warhead would be very nice.
I liked this design a lot when I first saw it. It is like the bigger brother of Rafael Spike Firefly.For a bigger warhead thing there was the forgotten blessing called ASELSAN VİHA.
It isn't only carrying a larger warhead at 3.5 kg. Its diving speed also reaches about 250+ km/h, far more than KARGU.
It can be folded down and recovered smoothly
View attachment 62445
There is an entire UN Commission report about Kargu's autonomous use, as in Kargu-2 hunting a target without human interference, in Libya. We are talking about a kamikaze drone that has been exported to 10 countries here, nobody buys stuff like this if it was as useless as being claimed here. Few pictures, even few dozen pictures, prove nothing in a system like this. Failures are always easier to photograph after all.then look at Kargu
We need drones like these kargu seems Unefficent in combat don't like the current claymore setup but If they start giving it warhead like these It could be a game changer just look at the ukrainian FPV drones.Such systems have to be simple and cheap don't understand why we are complicating things so much. Take a FPV drone slap a RPG-7 warhead or Mortar shell on it and it's good to go.
Those weaponized toys terrorized the RuAF on the battlefield, they took IFV, APC and Tanks out with those things ffs and then look at Kargu, LOL.
View attachment 62472
Well the autonomous part and night feature is nice but the warhead lacks lethality. Those features are probaly interesting for MIT and Special Forces but in a large scale conflict Kargu is definitely too expensive and complicated (production). All the technology it has for a drone simply carrying a Claymore.There is an entire UN Commission report about Kargu's autonomous use, as in Kargu-2 hunting a target without human interference, in Libya. We are talking about a kamikaze drone that has been exported to 10 countries here, nobody buys stuff like this if it was as useless as being claimed here. Few pictures, even few dozen pictures, prove nothing in a system like this. Failures are always easier to photograph after all.
You're also comparing drones that have munitions specifically designed to deal with armoured targets with a drone designed for use against personnel.
We wouldn't be using Kargu in a large scale conflict though. Ukranians are using FPV drones with munitions because they lack control of their own airspace and because of that they can't properly support their troops. If we are ever in that situation we'd be already fucked because there are only a handful of countries that can render our air force inert like that.but in a large scale conflict Kargu is definitely too expensive and complicated (production)
More like a single, murky sentence in a rather general report about Libya. A slander sniper shot. But we are getting ahead of ourselves.There is an entire UN Commission report about Kargu's autonomous use,
Logistics convoys and retreating HAF were subsequently hunted down and remotely engaged by the unmanned combat aerial vehicles or the lethal autonomous weapons systems such as the STM Kargu-2 (see annex 30) and other loitering munitions. The lethal autonomous weapons systems were programmed to attack targets without requiring data connectivity between the operator and the munition: in effect, a true “fire, forget and find” capability.
It's outrageous that such an inefficient design is in service of the TSK. The Kargu has some sophisticated capabilities but the drone destroys itself after only 1 use. Even if the small warhead is improved it would still be wasteful in a real war-time situation to throw away sophisticated drone components like this. Instead of self-destructing, it should accurately lob a grenade or mortar at its target using ballistics calculations and then return to base. Not only would it have more firepower but for the same cost you could attack 20 or more targets.I know how the warhead of the drone works. The problem is not in the directional warhead, if it is direct impact or not. The problem is the weak warhead that can't even lead to a good level of disintegration of a couple plastic parts.
This is from Azerbaijan in May. 2 wounded.
View attachment 62444
This is from Syria in August where the drone didn't even explode.
View attachment 62446
These are only in result of a shallow research. If I try harder I will find many, many more visual evidence of either faults or low effect on targets.
This drone has serious problems that needs to be sorted out but unfortunately no news regarding it as far as I can see. The drone in its current state is not effective and this is the least I can say based on what I saw trough the years of following the developments in areas where it was used.
It is hurting when I open up a video from Ukraine and see a drone made in someone's basement with parts purchased from Aliexpress doing a better job than it while we all know the sophisticated software Kargu uses, the fact that it is military spec rated performing like a firecracker. This is not right.
Kargu is expensive and not very efficent you need thousands of thousands suicide drones kargu has a very weak war head It can't eliminate what our enemies have be realistic.It is doubtful that Kargu would cost more than 10-20k$ at most. Thus Even If We bought 10.000 Kargu that would cost 100-200m$. A couple thousand Kargu is enough to Eliminate whatever our enemies throw at us. For such small and low cost weapons, we need more of them, No need to look for cheaper/lower quality quadcopter.