Navy fighter jets release swarm of Perdix micro-drones

>>33124928
Run pupper, run!

>>33124928
it appears that they use wireless communication so the first thing i would try is barrage jamming their electronics.

File: Krasukha-2_(Красуха-2)_Unloaded.jpg (78KB, 760x500px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 760x500px

EWAR. The low-cost solution to a high-cost problem.

>>33124928
We future war now?

>>33124966
> The low-cost solution

i will let you google the cost of system in your picture

>>33124928
We Armored Core now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Z4ujtk2_WE

44 million USD. Cost of two roughly upgraded fighter jets. And unlike toy drones with meme range and meme payload, it covers wide array of air threats at the range of 300km. More importantly, instead of wasting missile or a shell on them, it damages the onboard radio electronics, turning the swarm of UAVs into a useless heap of dead iron and plastic. A 'shot' of such a weapon costs nothing.

>>33125124
>. A 'shot' of such a weapon costs nothing.

can it solve world hunger while at it ?

>>33125145
If it kills people then it kinda does

>>33124928
Jammers, AAA, directed energy

>>33125145
Nah, that's FAB-500

File: 1488063540221.jpg (27KB, 383x472px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 383x472px

>>33124928
>that fucking sound they make
Imagine each one of these strapped with a small fragmentation charge and thousands of the things flying at your positions, screaming like banshees.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9QuO09z-SI

>>33125174
I dont think that would be such a good idea.
Sooner or later the enemy will find some of these intact and be able to reverse engineer them and when this happens, I do not want to be the one who deploys them out of the jet.

>>33125197
You mean like how ISIS is dropping impact grenades from drones from hobby king now?

>>33125197
>reverse engineer
There's nothing to reverse engineer. They're just small drones with a swarm AI.

>>33125203
ISIS is fighting against a force who is rather bad when it comes to technology, so they are working to some kind of degree.
But the drone, if taken over or when the signal gets interrupted will give away your position or worse, return back to you and attack your own.

>>33125211
Of course there is.
If you are able to access their system, it will help you to take over these things and use it against their own.

I dont think drones are such a good idea, when fighting against an enemy who reads more then one book.

>>33125232
>If you are able to access their system, it will help you to take over these things and use it against their own.
No. How the fuck would you take control of them if they're using programmable encryption and are channel hopping, like even ordinary radios are doing?

File: 1486340784605.jpg (22KB, 351x351px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 351x351px

>>33125174

>>33125174
I like the psychological warfare side of it.
The sound is very close to the sound that horror movies use to to build creeping suspense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6CaTL29_FQ

From the practical side this was a proof of concept and pathing and little else.

>>33125165
The punt gun makes a return.

File: gundieframe1.jpg (73KB, 524x429px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 524x429px

>>33124928

We starcraft now.

>>33124928
Build me an army of seagulls

>>33124966
>>33124964

people always talk about ECM yet i dont think anyone here actually knows how it works

>>33125239
Some of these things will not work and crash down, which gives the enemy a chance to take a look at this certain model.

If they are able to hack it, then you are fucked and millions will be thrown away because of one zero day.

Do you really think the russians or chinese will not be able to fuck with these things?

>>33125276
>If they are able to hack it
How do they hack low-power, encrypted and channelhopping communications in the time it takes for them to fly onto targets?

>>33125294
Are you going to build a new model for every new target?
They will work for a certain time, but then it will get hacked and its back to the drawing board.

>>33125275
Because they rely on flawed vidya logic.

File: 00000000000000000100000000001.png (220KB, 580x407px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 580x407px

shotgun

>>33124928
Do they have electric motors? Is that what I'm hearing around the 3 minute mark?

>>33125276
>Some of these things will not work and crash down, which gives the enemy a chance to take a look at this certain model.
>If they are able to hack it, then you are fucked and millions will be thrown away because of one zero day.
>Do you really think the russians or chinese will not be able to fuck with these things?

News flash. There is nothing in these things that isn't something you can get at radioshack and put together with an associates degree in programing and engineering. They are literally cheap fodder.

Russia and china probably already have tested something similar.

>>33125309
And why in the living fuck would the things not be programmable? Goddamn infantry radios are programmable, so why would these drones not be?

>>33124928
hope doggo was unharmed

>>33125328
But that is my point.
Its shit tech and will bite you in the ass sooner or later, because you have to eliminate the current model after the first remote attack on it, while throwing millions away in the process.

File: 1200px-UGM-109_hits_target_on_San_Clemente_Island_1986.jpg (103KB, 1200x742px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1200x742px

>>33125315

If that fails something bigger.

>>33125330
Of course they are, what is your point?
Do you really want to controll something which can be intercepted by your enemy and used against your own troops?

Looks great in video games, but no so much in real life when you are fighting against an enemy who has an understanding of the tech behind these things or atleast the resources to fuck with it to the point where it becomes a risk for your own force to operate these things.

>>33125328
He thinks real life is like a video game. "Hacking" is simple and you can hack anything, he probably thinks you can remote hack a street light to make chicken tendies.

>>33125394
>Of course they are, what is your point?
That a programmable drone can't be "hacked" by knowing how it's built. You need to have access to the programming itself, which would be changed after every single mission. HOW do you hack this?

>>33125342

All the talk of "hacking" them. What does that even mean?

And here's an idea. Drone with bomb loses signal, drone self destructs.

>>33125412
State sponsered cyber attacks are a real problem, just look at the US/Israel operation of fucking with Irans nuclear program.

Hacking these things is not simple, but states like the US are capable of attacking power grids, steal code from the producten centers, mess with the hardware etc.

No you want get chicken tendies by attacking the power grid, but you will shut of millions of people from accessing it.

>>33125423
> What is reverse engineering
People who will be behind these attacks have an insane amount of ressources to prepare and execute it.
These things will be hacked, it is just a matter of time.

>>33125424
When you have the code for these things, you are able to overwrite certain instructions, even if it has a kill switch.

File: hqdefault.jpg (16KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 480x360px

>>33124928
>that sound

File: 1487470633462.jpg (17KB, 320x426px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 320x426px

>>33125467
>What is reverse engineering
The act of figuring out how the things are built. This does not allow you to bypass their programmed encryption. Are you actually this retarded, or merely pretending? Why are you talking about things you don't even have an elementary understanding of?

>>33125423
just like the guys that hijacked a predator had access to the code amirite?

>>33124966
Doesn't work even against hobby planes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ed8ryxkrLwY

>>33125503
Through an unprotected GPS signal, tricking the drone into thinking it was fulfilling its mission, 5 years ago. I can assure you spoofing the GPS signal is not going to work on these things. Especially if they're well enough interlinked to verify signals and commands through the swarm's system.

>>33125486
Yeah, they will just look at the encryption and say fuck it because its always better to stop when things get hard.

I am not taking about fucking hadjis with a laptop running Kali, but state sponsered groups whos whole mission is to take them down.

>>33125520
Yeah, they'll just use their quantum computers to brute force their way through encryption in a few minutes, that currently would take the entire world's computing power decades, if not centuries. :^)

>>33125518
I never said it would, I was simply pointing out that you dont need code to find a hole.

>>33125232
>US and Russia is rather bad when it comes to technology

File: 234453213545.jpg (45KB, 592x453px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 592x453px

>>33124928
>military releases millions of dollars of drones to destroy target
>defeated by sandnigs who rigged up some $20 microwave ovens into pic related

File: 1420208281000.jpg (224KB, 1600x1015px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1600x1015px

>>33125534
Yeah, you could use GPS spoofing 5 years ago. Do you think the vulnerability still exists? In brand new, recently developed drones with groundbreaking swarm AI?

>>33125369
This is why I would never want to be air force

Missiles and shit like this freak me the fuck out and most of the time I'd rather be infantry

>>33125548
>>defeated by sa...
https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1ee_1487941582

File: JESUS H CHRIST.jpg (6KB, 250x208px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x208px

>>33125557

War has changed.

>>33125551
why do you keep going back to GPS? It's not the only system the drones use.

>>33125551
Do you really think they just stop looking for other vulnerabilitys?
Do you really think they will use their zero days just to show off?

You can never know if the current model is still secure.
The people who managed to fuck with them wont just give these exploits away or even show that they exist at all till it is usefull for them.

>>33125600
>usa equipment is shit and never works
> enemy is always best and everything and got abundance of every hi tech imaginable

>>33125552
Eh, I'd rather be the guy in the jet tens of miles away from where the missile's gonna impact. Plus missiles fired against aircraft in an AA configuration have a really quite surprisingly low hit rate. In the Eritrean-Ethiopian War in the 80s, jets, piloted by soviets and foreign trained professionals, managed to dodge 21 out of 22 missiles launched in an air-to-air fight.

>>33125364
>because you have to eliminate the current model after the first remote attack on it,
You don't understand. Hacking them is nearly pointless if you can already make them. It is kind of like how in WW1 everyone used practically the same bolt action rifles. Reverse engineering an enemy combatant's rifle doesn't really net you much of anything because you already understand everything about it.

In the same way, there is nothing special about these drones, no "secret sauce." There are no millions to be invested in their development that would be wasted by one of them falling into enemy hands.

As for the "just jam them" argument, the problem with that is it is trivial to randomize the frequencies they are using at the time of launch which makes jamming them everywhere none trivial. By which I mean, you would have to put a broad spectrum jammer on every vehicle for the "just jam them" argument to be effective.

Granted if you limit the scope to select vehicles or bases this becomes much easier to do but the drown swam is still an effective tool the.

>>33125596
Because GPS spoofing was the only way the drones could be hacked. You can't break the encryption on the things in any viable amount of time and if the swarm uses a blockchain system for its maneuvering and orders, it's going to be pretty much impossible to actually hack them.

>>33125600
>Do you really think they just stop looking for other vulnerabilitys?
No. They used GPS spoofing because that's the only thing they could.
>You can never know if the current model is still secure.
That's why you reprogram your drones after every mission, much like you reprogram infantry radios after operations, or if security's been compromised.
>The people who managed to fuck with them wont just give these exploits away or even show that they exist at all till it is usefull for them.
The people don't manage to fuck with them, because brute forcing through encryption, or actually hacking through it in the few dozen minutes these things will be airborne is not possible at our current level of technology. When EW units start integrating quantum computing, THEN you can talk about breaking the encryption.

>>33125619
>Plus slavshit missiles fired against aircraft in an AA configuration have a really quite surprisingly low hit rate.
Fixed.

>>33124928
lasers

>>33125637
As has been said by many a things that are "unhackable". All it takes is time.

>>33125648
All of them, unless the AA is used in an ambushing fashion. Missiles fired from a great distance as a force multiplier, interception or harassing are not going to hit their target most of the time. The plane's just going to dive down, take evasive maneuvers and that's it.

>>33125655
you cant be fucking serious

>>33125655
>All it takes is time.
Yeah, exactly. Years, decades, centuries, millenia. The one thing you specifically don't have when it comes to intercepting airborne vehicles. By the time you've figured out what you're even working with, the drone's going to have finished its mission and returned to base. Even if you break the encryption, they'll just have reprogrammed drones on the next flight and your work is worthless.

>>33125626
>Hacking them is nearly pointless if you can already make them
What?
Imagne somone takes over one of your drones and attacks your own troops with it.
They just managed to let you pay for producing it, while killing you with your own tech.

>>33125637
> No. They used GPS spoofing because that's the only thing they could.
Because you have access to all their zero days and exploits.

> cracking them
Way do they need to go down that route, when they could also attack the people responsable for developing that encryption.
Espionage is also a way to bypass it.

>>33125648
Well hey, just so happens to be what a fair portion of the world uses, so even more reason to not be afraid then huh?

>>33125174

They should put little speakers in them and play "Flight of the Valkyries"

>We Apocalypse Nao!"

https://youtu.be/Mkp8ZdQ9SqI

>>33125672
Yeah I am, you are just retarded. You clearly have no concept of what "hacking" actually is.

>>33125685
Even with military hardware many components are off the shelf meaning there is documentation out there on what it uses/how it is used.

>>33125688
>Way do they need to go down that route, when they could also attack the people responsable for developing that encryption.
Because knowing how the encryption is designed does not allow you access to the codes used to encrypt it. If you do not have the key, you will take millenia to brute force through it.
>Espionage is also a way to bypass it.
No, unless they've got spies working first hand with the goddamn drones, involved with the programming itself and somehow manage them to transmit the data to your troops on the ground before the drones are on station.

>>33125725
>Even with military hardware many components are off the shelf meaning there is documentation out there on what it uses/how it is used.
As I've stated a dozen times in this thread, that does not matter at fucking all. Please at least glean an elementary level of knowledge before you start spouting bullshit.

>make drones with mission preprogrammed into them
>No way to "hack" since they don't even listen to any signals
>???
>Profit!

And your idea of hacking is totally fucked up

>>33125725
no you can't just hack and take over an autonomous drone that is specifically designed to not be "hackable"

Not without inside knowledge of the drone, knowing what hardware is on it/source code of its programming/etc

File: whew.jpg (33KB, 600x435px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 600x435px

>>33125732
>>33125744

File: 1485664705359.png (673KB, 777x631px) Image search: [Google]

673KB, 777x631px

>>33125174
>>33125244
>lA CUCHA RACHAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>>33125174

SUAV road kills

>We BF4 nao!

https://youtu.be/wh8voPESN70

>>33125744
>that is specifically designed to not be "hackable"
Designed for and making it work in the real world is a big difference.
There have been many companies out there who made those claims, followed by "ups, we fucked up"

>>33125782
so you are going to ignore fact everyone been beating our head with in this thread

that

a. you are not going to brute force encryption for the time those drones fly
b. you will not even have equipment at place to attempt it
c. you will never have time to react and prepare to hack those drones

basically without massive advances in computing and availability of those computers for general military use you are not going to hack those drones in the way you imagine hacking (btw you even use term wrongly)

next time bait gently

>>33125725
>there is documentation out there on what it uses/how it is used
Please provide documentation on this tech.
https://www.mayflowercom.com/us/products/gps-saasm-receivers/navassure-100-saasm-py-code-gps-receiver/#tab-id-1

File: 1304437067529.jpg (46KB, 400x533px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 400x533px

>>33125174

>>33125667
>The plane's just going to dive down, take evasive maneuvers and that's it.
Unless they are slavshit planes with slavshit RWS.

>>33125174
I'm more of a Stuka fan, that works for primal tribesman running towards you, but the exact same design of the siren a Stuka used on a smaller scale would give you a very loud high-pitched whine.

Depending on where you were and how many of them there were, it would drown out almost everything.

>>33125275
broadcast white noise accross the EM spectrum?

>>33126098
>Can be easily overpowered
>Can be filtered by a toaster
>Directional transmission
>Anti-rad

Read a book you nigger.

>>33126147
so your saying there is a chance?

will this shit fuck with SAM's?

>>33126238
How would it?

>>33126238
Naturally.

>>33126256
Imagine a coastal invasion, sam all over the beach front, you put some subs near the shore and send these little fucker out to take out the sams and send air support for the beach landing.

>>33126279
1. These couldn't take out a SAM emplacement
2. No.
3. Anti-Radiation missiles
4. Regular missiles since you presumably know the location of the SAM sites.
5. Why are you doing a fucking contested amphibious landing IN THE CURRENT YEAR.

>>33125688

>Hacking them is nearly pointless if you can already make them
>>What?
>Imagne somone takes over one of your drones and attacks your own troops with it.
>They just managed to let you pay for producing it, while killing you with your own tech.

You are assuming that hijacking them would be easier to do that jamming them. It would in fact be harder.

File: image.jpg (419KB, 1575x2000px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 1575x2000px

>>33124928

>>33124928
>tfw call of duty was more realistic than Arma all along

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqaRtu6R4SY

>>33124928
So is the swarm for jihading or are they for battlefield data gathering?