Post #1631432

2026-04-16 13:39 UTC

So, one of the really interesting things to me about this approach is that it offers the same asymmetric value proposition that cheap attack drones do to modern pre-drone IADS. That is: this is a platform that costs 10-15k, and an AGM-88 of modern manufacture costs almost 900k, and a Kh-31 costs about 550k - and, just as importantly, both require a long time to manufacture. So, you could theoretically make a moderately large distributed array sprinkled over a few square kilometers, and even if they’re ALL turned on, it quickly becomes logistically infeasible to knock them all out without spending a silly quantity on antirad munitions, as well as massively attriting your stocks of antirad munitions. And if you turn like 10-25% of them on at a time and cycle through your array, the problem becomes even harder for the attacker. And if you have some sort of process or mechanism - like, oh I don’t know, figuring out how to do light aerial transport with cargo drones, or even figuring out how to mount these distributed array nodes on the drones themselves, and some sort of lightweight tether for providing power - the problem becomes a MASSIVE pain in the ass for an adversary (especially that last idea, which introduces z-axis and immediate maneuverability, such that the array could feasibly detect and altogether avoid an incoming antirad munition). And that’s the paradigm of modern warfare - not just drones, but also networked and attritable systems that maintain functionality when elements are taken offline

Replies (6)

@CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml 2026-04-17 06:35

Could they not “just” use FPV drones with nades to take those flimsy radars out anyway? Instead of expensive ammunition. If it’s possible then it slashes down the price to take out these radars to a few thousands at most

Open ##1631431
@elucubra@sopuli.xyz 2026-04-16 15:14

adding to this. I imagine that the emitter by itself costs a fraction, so set-up a huge array of these dumb emitters, and a few active systems randomly within that array. You'd essentially create an interdiction zone.

Open ##1668315
@brbposting@sh.itjust.works 2026-04-16 15:23

If everyone who studied this went into medicine instead of death…

Open ##1668316
@bright@piefed.social 2026-04-16 17:39

Unless I'm missing something in your plan i don't think that would work well. If these radar stations aren't surrounded by very serious defensive systems for hundreds of miles in every direction, then they'll simply be blown up by dumb howitzer shells that only cost around 2000 dollars. Howitzers are cheap, relatively long range, mobile, and accurate enough. If you don't have strong enough defenses to prevent the howitzers from moving into range, then they'll just blow up all your radar stations with cheap shells.

Open ##1668317
@TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 2026-04-16 17:13

Why suddenly are these required to be taken out by anti rad munitions? It's radar. They're practically setting off a beacon of their location through operation. No I'm not disagreeing with you on the principle and have been making the exact same argument about scaling and cost in regards to the US defense doctrine for years. But there is no special munitions required to take out a small radar system, which is basically a bunch of highly sensitive electronics which must be exposed for the instrument to work. Any basic quad drone with a reasonable payload could easily take one out. This doesn't detract from you main point, which I entirely agree with and have been promoting for years.

Open ##1668318
@N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 2026-04-16 14:35

Thanks for the insightful comment!

Open ##1668319