thoughts on this
>>65124265>What is sonar?
>>65124265Layers of defense.
>>65124269>needs sonar when he has gods eye view
>>65124265T-he cable is too short, anon! This wouldn't work!
First, will these underwater drones be remotely controlled, or will their actions be left to an automated program using AI?
>>65124265>thoughts on thisthat would be a very nice addition to my Sub-Carrier™
>>65124265towed antenna cable instead of wires
>>65124369Or just use blue light communication
Modern torpedoes can already track targets themselves. Just make a drone boat that can submerge when contact is made and hit boats on its own.
>>65124265Lasers your drone...Now what?
>>65124398Detect it first nigger
>>65124397Pretty sure a destroyer would outrun it
>>65124265Pointless drone memeing, give it a periscope for the same capability without worrying about waves taking it out.
>>65124422The drone makes sense if you want to increase the line of sight.
>>65124428Torpedos don't have that much range.
>>65124414The whole point would be to not get spotted. Its difficult to pick up a small drone right by the surface with sonar or hydrophones.
>>65124265Where does the fuel come from?
>>65124265Poorfag problem
Yo Dawg! I heard you like torpedoes.
>>65124488pimp my ride aired 25 years ago
>>65124412>what is radar
>>651245082004-2007 is more like 20 years ago.
>>65124293Pidgeon operated
>>65124412It's right there
>>65124265If you come from a nation that can poo in the loo you'll understand immediately the hundreds of things wrong with this. If not then there is no point explaining.
you fuckin idiots realize that not every single thing needs a touch screen or a drone to work right
>>65124430Extend the range
>>65125092It's like you don't want to make money. Dornes and AI are the future. Line must go up.
>>65124585You do realize how hard is it to detect small quad drones right? Even with microdoppler detection or EO/IR we can't see it far enough.
>>65124265>Get fucking snatched by a fucking seagull who takes slowly flying drone as a wounded bird and therefore an easy prey
>>65124428I was thinking something similar. An AUV which is like two stage wire guided torpedo that uses info from drones like this to hunt the target. One of the plus point is that thw latency of reaction and target discrimination is almost instantaneous compared to sonar or wake guidance.
>>65124428Wouldn’t a balloon be better? It’d have less risk of water damage.
I M P L E S S I V EMPLESSIVE
>>65124265fpv quads work pretty well underwater you can even buy ones off the shelf for i can totally see quads being mounted on shallow water drone subs.
>>65125092It's like we have gone backwards from guidance systems for the whims of thirdie cheapfags
>drones are mildly successful a few times>browns act like they've unlocked the hard counter to all other forms of warfareYou're gonna be real embarrassed when the whites cook up a counter, Aquavelvajad.
Uncrewed subs exist already
>>65124293Depends on how bad the war is going for your side. If things are going well and you've got Boomer politicians in charge, they'll be remotely controlled. If things have gone to shit and all the oldfags are dead or in exile, and you don't care if you create an uncontrollable threat that renders a whole area of the sea unusable for everyone for years to come, then they'll be fully automated.
>>65124269Photons are passive.
>>65128471Sonar can be as well.
>>65124265Looks pretty retarded to me.
>>65124265what kind of 3rd world shit is this?
>>65127450>when the whites cook up a counter
>>65124265it's suboptimal
>>65129369Too bad we have nixie
>>65124265there's no reason to use a quadcopter drone for surface search instead of USVs, MPAs or satellites
>>65124265A mine with more steps? Wait until OP learns what Quicksink is.
>>65125166quadcopters are a lot easier to spot over water than you appear to realize
>>65129380...ago? What success has iran had? A handful of aircraft and two radars? They've launched well over 1000 sneeds. That's a pretty pathetic success rate especially considering the unpreparedness
>>65129933Sure, but the problem is distinguishing between a drone and a random seafowl.
>>65129965Again, that isn't nearly as hard as you appear to think. Especially at the short distances of OP's scenario.
>>65129994What makes you think it's a short distance?
>>65124430Anon, torpedoes from 90 years ago had 40 km range.
>>65129998Anon stop pretending to be retarded, a quadcopter that is tethered to an underwater drone is not going to be very high off the water.
>>65130005And why exactly is that? Drones can fly fairly high, and if the tether is an optic cable it's not going to weigh very much. The drone's visual sensors are not going to be very effective, but you could put a bunch of receivers on the thing and make it a valuable sensor platform. Just having an RWR on it would be pretty useful for locating military vessels and aircraft. Have it move around in a 3D space and you have a rudimentary direction and distance to the target. Have multiple units work in conjunction and the data is going to be quite solid. Maybe not enough to use for targeting data, but certainly useful.
>>65130113You didn't have to write so much just to admit the drone has to be pretty close.
