|
Top-level
 @isaackuo @cstross The thing you're trying to counter is the reconnaissance. (Whether it's on "massing for assault" scale or "is that $POLITICAL_FIGURE?" scale.) For that, you most want to break the comms loop; you next want to destroy the drone beyond its range of resolution. Kinetic solutions against individual drones need more range than a shotgun because the range of resolution is greater than shotgun range. (Hence 30mm smart rounds as the reflexive solution.) 7 comments
Those quadcopters make quite a bit of noise. I can imagine cheap mini missiles might be able to target them by their sound.   @cstross @graydon @isaackuo they're already in the field though, since the convention on banning human-blinding weapons made exceptions for using them on vehicles and any sort of optical devices they might have even the crews are considered in unit with the vehicle and not people for purposes of the convention as long as they're operating the vehicle drones appearing will make more dazzlers appear - and I feel that sadly where there's opportunity, there is crime... Desperation to survive may be the overriding consideration. As noted, they're already in the field. Shtora-1 attempts to use dazzlers to disrupt anti-tank missile guidance. This system has not been very effective in Ukraine, but that has more to do with the nature of the weapons being used and Ukrainian familiarity with how to try and mitigate laser warning sensors. In principle, the system could be modified to try and dazzle drones. |
Gregory's Server
@graydon @cstross
Heavy shotguns are a countermeasure against enemy killer drones/bombs, not looker drones.
If you want to take out lookers, anti-drone drones seem to be the most promising approach for now. A 30mm smart round could easily be more expensive than the target, and also more expensive than an anti-drone drone.