24/7/365 - Drone War Changed America | 63 comments (63 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

to shoot down a drone?

How high do they fly, how fast? What's the best anti-drone weapon? Will a jump in anti-drone tech make them suddenly obsolete?

_{It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue
- Queen Elizabeth II}

by eurogreen on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 08:49:23 AM EST

Re: How hard can it be (none / 0)

The MQ1 Predator drone flight at a maximum of 7629m or 25000ft at a speed of 217km/h (135mph). A roughly standard ground-air missile is the FIM92 Stinger which weights 10kg (22lbs) and has a range of 8km (26000 ft) and can speed at 700m/s (2520km/h, 1600mph). If you have them, then the predator is a sitting duck. I suppose the difficulty is spotting them, present models are rather silent.

res humà m'és aliè

by Antoni Jaume on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 02:04:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 1)

Operating characteristics of the next generation of drones are classified but it appears they will have an operating ceiling of 70,000 feet, stealthed, and carry a fighter/bomber-equivalent weapon payload.

There's no technical reason they can't meet those design specifications and there's good operational reasons for the Air Force, etc., to issue them. So I expect a "jump" in capability within the next 4 years.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 02:11:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 0)

Of course, still the faster they go the harder it is for them to observe the territory, which is, at least for now the main point. They may be the substitute of bombers and cruise missils.

res humà m'és aliè

by Antoni Jaume on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 02:24:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 0)

Just as happened with the "aeroplanes" in WW One it seems the drones are being split between intelligence/surveillance craft and fighter/interdiction craft. The next step is high-payload bombers, and I'll bet someone, somewhere, is already working on them.

With the US B-52 fleet of heavy bombers becoming overworked and tired I that "somewhere" is "here."

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 03:00:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Let's See (none / 0)

Very hard to shoot these things down because it's almost impossible to detect them and air-to-air missiles aren't designed to operate at 70,000 feet.

Flight speed is anywhere from "loiter" to over Mach 5.

A reliable anti-drone weapon system hasn't been specified, designed, tested, and deployed.

Given the low cost of drones, to purchase and to operate, versus other "force projection" weapon systems I doubt they will become obsolete in our lifetime.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 02:04:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's See (none / 0)

I don't think the Mach 5 are operative for now. Mach 5 as a lot of constraints, even if you can save the pilot.

Mach 5 is conservatively 6000km/h or 3750mph.

res humà m'és aliè

by Antoni Jaume on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 02:18:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's See (4.00 / 2)

Fighter aircraft technology has, for decades, been design-limited to the low-tech specifications of a human. The airframes, etc., can withstand 12 g maneuvers. Do that to a pilot and you've got strawberry jam in the cockpit.

Also the reaction times and experience of a human pilot are (1) bad compared to cybernetic decision speed and (2) 1:1, with a cybernetic, expert system, in control every "pilot" would have the ability and experience of a Top-Gun pilot instructor. No more steep learning curve for new pilots: the operator hits the "evade" or "attack" button and Bob's your uncle.

Given the fuel requirements for Mach 5+ I think that would be the top speed, used during transition from base to patrol/combat area. In those areas "loiter" would be the normal flight speed, only going higher during actual combat, as a predictive guess.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 03:17:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's See (4.00 / 2)

There's no reason to go fast at all during that transition from base to patrol area ; actually you want maximum fuel economy for that part.

And without the need to maintain a pilot awake in the cockpit, nothing prevents, say, a 30 hours flight from US to anywhere in the world at best fuel economy speed...

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Wed Nov 30th, 2011 at 05:02:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 1)

Given that they communicate with their handlers with wireless communication I think the relevant question is how hard it is to hack and/or scramble the communication. From the diary it appears it is not that hard.

So rather then shooting down hostile drones, seize them in midair and send them back.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 02:10:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 1)

Bet you a euro the US military is working on securing the Command-and-Control communication links even as I type this.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 02:12:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (4.00 / 2)

Tapping their communications is significantly different from taking them over.

Still, the fact that they didn't slap a standard commercial-grade crypto the things boggles the mind.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 02:14:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 1)

I was thinking more about the virus, though I admit that was not very clear.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 03:50:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 0)

Protecting a communications channel from being hacked is a simple process IF you implement hardware security and adequate software handshaking protocols, e.g., 'offset' the data within the binary word by some number of bits and AND off the NULL ones.

(Naturally you'll have to know assembler language to do this ... which you young uns generally don't :-p)

(lol)

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 04:21:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 0)

Won't (always) work if your hacker has identical hardware and knows your algorithms.

Absolute security is a Very Hard Problem. Real security is always an affordable trade-off between absolute security and cash.

And didja know that some IBM (and likely other) mainframes include built-in encryption hardware?

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 05:53:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 1)

The hardware can be protected if they are kept physically safe and the schematics and assembly procedures are burned after the production run.

There's all kinds of games you can play with the software: data binary word length, binary word placement, algorithm cycling, synch/desynch on the transmissions, burst/stream transmissions, wide band/narrow band, etc. etc. etc.

I wouldn't trust any generally available encryption programs. If they are a usual part of the IBM software then they can be cracked if enough resources are thrown at the problem.

Despite everything, above, One Time Pads are the only way to go if you want to ensure security.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 06:22:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 1)

Assuming no one steals your OTP...

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 06:25:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 1)

They'd have to steal them, copy them and reinsert them into your logistics before you notice they're gone.

Possible, in theory, but if the other guys can pull that stunt then your organisation is either so hopelessly compromised or crushingly incompetent that somebody stealing your bombs mid-flight is not the greatest of your concerns.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 06:55:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 1)

Keeping stuff physically safe is pretty hard in a combat environment. See how the Soviets got hold of the Sidewinder technology...

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Wed Nov 30th, 2011 at 05:04:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 1)

Meteor Scatter Telemetry is harder to intercept, works even if satcoms get busted, and is way way cheaper.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Thu Dec 1st, 2011 at 01:32:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How hard can it be (none / 0)

Obviously you use an anti-drone drone. Question is, who in the long run can make them cheapest?

by asdf on Tue Nov 29th, 2011 at 07:18:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Easy (none / 0)

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Wed Nov 30th, 2011 at 11:15:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Easy (none / 0)

No one questions jets can shoot down unarmed surveillance drones operating in the jet's flight parameters when using an AtA missile operating within it's design specifications.

Georgia operates 10 year old Hermes 450 drones

with a primary mission of reconnaissance, surveillance and communications relay

The craft has an 18,000 foot ceiling and has a 52 horsepower Wankel, internal combustion, engine.

Hardly front-line, high-tech, equipment.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Thu Dec 1st, 2011 at 12:52:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

24/7/365 - Drone War Changed America | 63 comments (63 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Top Diaries

What's Next, After the Slam?

Shock Election Loss Rutte IV In Senate Race

Honduras Establishes Close Ties with China

A Return to Normalcy?

A Grand Slam for Ireland?

NI Protocol: It's all over bar the shouting?

Recent Diaries

Struggle NWO Unipolar or Multilateralism

Neo-Nazi Marches Across Europe

Fascism Unites America, Israel and EU Neo-Nazis

What's Next, After the Slam?

Settler Extremism Blessed by Jerusalem Leaders

US Interference In Lebanon-Syria-Ira
q

City Agriculture - March 17, 2023

Shock Election Loss Rutte IV In Senate Race

Stalemate Endures, Pessimism Grows, Deaths Mount

Honduras Establishes Close Ties with China

A Grand Slam for Ireland?

Living In Spain and Social-Democracy

USA Censorship Act to Kill Disinformation

Flying Fortresses and Nuclear Threat

Universal Criticism Asylum Threshold EU Fortress

China Trade and Relations

SBU As a Terror Network

A Return to Normalcy?

Georgia and Foreign Agents or Spy Law

Nord Stream Blasts Timeline of Denial

Occasional Series