No drones have not mad X aspect of war obsolete! They are a fucking RC plane with bombs attached to them. Maybe one day in the future when they have massive drones storms they will but for now they are just another weapons system-stop making these threads!
What blew up this time?
>>64461932more like what JEWED up this time
>>64461932
>>64461932Lazerpig's liver, and asshole.
>>64461988jfc how does a single video repeating the verbatim military-standard assessment that drones are neat but not the end of warfare even cause seethe
>>64461988He should get a billboard, just to generate more seethe. How does he do it?
They're just another weapon system that happens to be the most effective weapon in modern war which is why the majority of casualties in Ukraine are being caused by drones on both sides. Laserpig is a fat retard. The only people who care what he has to say are other fat retards. Drones caused the vast majority of casualties in the Global War on Terror. They cause a disproportionally high number of casualties in the conflicts in which they are used.
>>64461995When the battleship became obsolete, stubborn officers refused to believe it because they invested heavily in it. >muh airforceNo F-35 gonna intercept a sub-1 meter sized FPV drone flying at 50 meters height.>just uparmor MBTsYou can, but that will increase cost, add weight and fuel consumption, all for diminishing returns>just give MBTs SAMs broCost for again, diminishing returns>just shoot at the drones broHow did that work out for the ziggers?>muh microwave/laser wunderwafflesInverse square law and power requirements>just jam them broYou just broadcasted your position to everyone within 50 km>muh invisibility/ahnold predator IR cloakDoesn't work well and even if it did, you'll get spotted if you movedWar changes whether you like it or not. Entrenched interests will try to deny it for reasons of pride, tradition or simply money. Europeans pooh poohed on the lessons learnt from the American Civil War because to them, it was a war of backwards hicks. They were in for a rude shock when WWI broke out soon after.
>>64463355>ATGMs are fielded, this is the end of armor>SACLOS ATGMs are fielded, this is the end of armor>attack helicopters are fielded, this is the end of armor>NLOS top attack ATGMs are fielded, this is the end of armor>drones are fielded, this is the end of armorthere are hundreds of high IQ planners in multiple countries making the doctrine for the next 20 years, and what is the universal conclusion? heavier, bigger, better equipped armored divisions
OP is a frogposting faggot, but he’s also right.
I feel like it's the same fixation thirdies and retards have on missiles because they're "cost effective" against the thing they're meant to destroy (as if cannon shells aren't even more so) and because war is like a blank starcraft map where you crash units into each other until your opponent runs out of minerals and you win, that means they're the best.
>>64461885You waste your breath preaching to the deaf. Dronefags don't see the hundreds upon thousands of intercepted drones, they only see the videos where they drop a grenade on someone or fly into a tank and conclude that drones kill everything's because they're mentally stunted at 12 and don't understand what reporting bias is
>>64461885I saw a clip of a ukie drone team getting droned by the ruskies. Sorry if I don’t find drone teams droning each other to be interesting or cool.
>>64463355>When the battleship became obsolete, stubborn officers refused to believe it because they invested heavily in it.No they didn't, carriers had replaced battleships before the war was even over and they had cancelled the montana-class battleships in favor of more than 20 fleet carriersBattleships were only used because they were already there and they were just finding a use for them
>>64463355Okay but how do drones replace tanks or planes in their role? Anti-ship mines don't make ships obsolete because they can't do a ship's job
>>64463355I just don’t see why integrating an rcws station to an aps’ radar system wouldn’t largely defang the drone threat. Even without jumping to the 20-30mm anti drone weapons shown on concepts for next gen mbts I would think a 7.62-12.7mm machine gun fed radar targeting data and fired from a stabilized mount should be a very strong countermeasure
>>64463355The important thing lots of people miss is for a weapons system to be obsolete there needs to be something else that does the same job better.Battleships died because torpedoes and anti-ship missiles are better at sinking ships and aerial bombs are better at destroying fortifications.>No F-35 gonna intercept a sub-1 meter sized FPV drone flying at 50 meters heightCorrect, they will continue to drop bombs while other systems intercept drones.>just uparmor MBTsIMO we need unmanned turrets so heavy armour is only required on the hull.>just give MBTs SAMs broNo one with a brain is saying this unless you class an interceptor drone or autocannon a "SAM".>just shoot at the drones broWith what? I think BAE 3P autocannon ammo would work pretty well, I don't think rifles and shotguns are very viable.>muh microwave/laser wunderwafflesIMO microwaves are good for homeland airbase defence to avoid being Operation Spiderweb'd but not practical for frontline deployment.>just jam them broNope, between automation and fibre jamming is only viable against a retard trying to hit Trump with a DJI full of tannerite not for militaries.>muh invisibility/ahnold predator IR cloakAre you just making shit up or has someone said this?>War changes whether you like it or notAll that has changed is PGMs that use to be big, heavy and expensive are now small, light and cheap enough to be used by infantry against infantry instead of just by vehicles against other vehicles.
>>64463600>IMO microwaves are good for homeland airbase defence to avoid being Operation Spiderweb'd but not practical for frontline deployment.Lasers are also perfect for close range air defense because they are only limited by the rotation of their mountPower requirement isnt really an issue for short range defense since a small 100kw laser for shooting down quadcopter drones easily fits on a 8x8 AFV with no issueThe stryker shorad will have a laser for short range and a cannon for medium range, easily covering all the bases posed by small drones
>>64463618I think lasers will work for static drone defences but I am a little dubious about their frontline use because any damage to the lens / lens protector will take them out of action. If you just hammer the area with plunging MG fire or airburst arty you are going to hit the lens eventually.
>>64463629I dont know if spraying ammo across kilometers of battlefield hoping to hit a lens is much of a tactic, and if you can drop arty on a vehicle then just do that to disable it; but I also think it doesn't really matter because mini-CIWS paired with acoustic sensors seems to be the solution alot of industries are leaning towards
>>64463629>If you just hammer the area with plunging MG fire or airburst arty you are going to hit the lens eventually.The very small size of the lens means it isnt any more likely to be hit than, say, a gun barrelAnd an artillery barrage that's so massive that it poses a threat to the lens would likely knock the entire vehicle out, so it doesnt really matter what weapon its carrying The lens can also take minor cracking without losing functionality, small obstructions don't affect its ability to focus, unless the cracking is so extensive that it blocks most of the light passing through itIn any case, the small lasers we see mounted on vehicles has a protective cover on top of the laser, the laser aperture is not visible even when firingYou wouldnt be able to rely on a random piece of frag or a stray bullet to disable it
>>64463642The lens we have seen are pretty fucking big and when I say airburst arty I mean like flak high as frag falling will be more than enough to damage it.>>64463644Yeah, I think autocannon airburst and mini-CIWS are going to be the standard for awhile.
>>64461885>Any failure in modern warfare is a result of the lack of sufficient artillery support and the lack of proper spirits on the part of the troops, the armored troops and the national will to support them.>Kim Il Sung, 1st book of recollectionshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jGz-oPnhLshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwbvWDoF1d4
>>64461961Sòyjak is shit and so are you.
>>64463650>The lens we have seen are pretty fucking bigThats the THEL, intended for shooting down rockets and mortar roundsVehicle mounted lasers are essentially just armored boxes or cylinders, they look like your typical RWS and the laser proper is behind an armor glass coverThe laser isnt any more vulnerable than any other remote weaponAnd the 50-100kw lasers that fit on top of vehicles still have a 5km range, more than enough to swat small quadcopters before they pose a threat
>>64461885I wish we would stop making frog threads too OP.
>>64463662Basedjack conquered 4chan.
>>64462120>make fun of ziggers>make fun of Serbs >make fun of dronefagsHe makes fun of the most annoying thirdies which causes them to rage like children.
>>64463355>When the battleship became obsolete, stubborn officers refused to believe it because they invested heavily in it.The fuddiest of lore
>>64463355>How did that work out for the ziggers?If we're going to be using that argument here, then clean drinking water, ammunition that doesn't look like lasagna, and medical care that post-dates the Age of Sail are impossibilities.
>>64461885Apparently OPs RCPlussy
>>64461885Lasers will make them obsolete within 10 years, hell they already would be if infantry carried high powered green laser pointers. Even a split second strike on the optics would disable them with one of those. Now imagine a system that can actually burn through the plastic casing in a split second and fry the innards and have it be deployable at the platoon level.
>>64465313Lasers are in a geometrical power growth & cost reduction curve right now. In 5 years megawatt laser trucks will be viable for every first world military. It will cripple most artillery and air strikes.Maybe tanks will make a comeback after all. I still bet on more ground-hugging drones tho. Switchblade swarms will be the new heavy weapon of choice.
>>64463600>there needs to be something else that does the same job betterdrones do it cheaper. that's enough of a benefit to justify switching to them>f-35s will continue dropping bombsdrones are already dropping bombs. they do it much cheaper than f-35s. you can drop bombs from a B-25 but, like the f-35, they are inefficient compared to drones.
>>64465350>they do it much cheaper than f-35s.Drones have way worse payloads and range, and are vulnerable to jamming. Unless you are referring to things like the MQ-1
>>64465350>drones do it cheaper. that's enough of a benefit to justify switching to themSo you think drones do the same job as the MBTs you say they have made obsolete? You think they are just as capable against fortified structures as M1147 Advanced Multi-Purpose? Then why are drone teams in Ukraine safe under 3 feet of dirt? >drones are already dropping bombsOk, you just don't understand kinetic energy as a concept. Bunker busters work by having enough kinetic energy to pen fortifications before detonation, a VOG dropped from a drone doesn't.
>>64465330The problem is these are high concentration of value targets. So they will be preferenced by the other side of drones which is the high speed guided - i.e. ballistic missiles, hypersonic terminal whatever. Costly but not as costly. Its a terrible idea to be the opposite of dispersed in guided weapons meta
>>64467047>The problem is these are high concentration of value targets.the benefit of lasers is that they create a space around them in which small, low-altitude drones cannot easily operate>Its a terrible idea to be the opposite of dispersed in guided weapons metabeing dispersed in a losing state to begin with because it allows a defeat in detail
