Us military MUST replace drone operator.

>>35096188
call of duty / 10

>>35096191
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YVNIWuLs_7E

>>35096188
I could swear small RC planes deployed like that was on the agenda anyways a few years ago simply because cheap yet easy recon is awesome.

What I'm wondering about is would they ever seriously consider "flying grenades"? A small and cheap quadcopter with a cheapo camera carrying a lump of shrapnel covered C-4 could be flown right into a window or other hole in a structure and detonated. Could fly a small horde of them into a base and just fuck shit up.

>>35096188
The smaller the drone the more its affected by wind. Go to shart-mart. Buy a drone and try flying it in just a bit of wind. Also take notice the amount of sound it produces.

File: 645645.png (46KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 250x250px

>>35096233
>What I'm wondering about is would they ever seriously consider "flying grenades"?
http://defense-update.com/products/l/switchblade_31122010.html

>>35096191
>>35096188
This is literally faggotory knights vs muskets 2.0.
>muh swords

http://defence-blog.com/news/switchblade-kamikaze-uav-has-been-found-in-syria.html
http://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Screenshot_110.jpg
https://mobile.almasdarnews.com/article/pictures-syrian-army-shoots-three-us-drones-northern-latakia/

>>35096233
A winged aircraft has a lot more range and with computer/computer assisted guidance quad doesn't offer all that much advantage.

>>35096560
If you're flying a tiny whoop, maybe, but anything above a 3 inch drone is going to have power to spare. Bear in mind, your standard 250 drone has a giant 4S battery on it. Wind isn't really a problem.
>>35096709
Except quads can power down, loiter somewhere, dont need takeoff space, and can enter buildings with relative ease as long as your vTx has enough power to keep connection

File: 845241576_803.jpg (79KB, 600x398px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 600x398px

>>35096778
That's actually quite the interesting idea to just have the quad land somewhere if it's not needed atm. Also fixed wing aircraft don't really need any takeoff space either, just throw them or launch them from some tube or something like with the switchblade. And yeah fixed wing aircraft can't really operate indoors that is a definitive advantage to quads, although a small plane can just as easily fly into an open window and detonate it's charge as a quad.

Now what i'd really like to see is a computer guided swarm of these or something similar armed with ARs strafing some hajis.

>>35096890
>quad vs fixedwing
Why not both?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_2CGT2KOMY

>>35097112
Well yeah sure but when you wanna go a bit bigger, like maybe you wanna carry a few kilos of explosives you find out that you need hell of a lot of thrust for vertical takeoff when you could carry the same amount of shit with a lot of less thrust with just an ordinary fixed wing.
For recon a hybrid design is imo a pretty great idea, great loiter time, range, and with the possibility to do vertical takeoffs and such.

>>35096188

so what's the endurance of a quad?

because a reaper (preds are retired now) is like 12 hours or something ridiculous.

File: 800px-Shadow_200_UAV_(2).jpg (107KB, 800x603px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 800x603px

Isnt the biggest problem that the military industrial complex is severely bloated and not actually designed to produce the most effective fighting force, rather it's designed to solely extract as much US tax payer money as possible.

This means that the drones would cost like 50k+ each.

The rq-7 shadow cost 750k per unit according to wikipedia in 2001
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAI_RQ-7_Shadow

The only way I could see the cost coming down is if the US or any western military starts fighting an opponent that fields drones in mass and uses swarm tactics effectively. I imagine ISIS might get there eventually but random goat fuckers are still like 10-20 years away from that kind of sophistication.

>>35097220
>I imagine ISIS might get there eventually but random goat fuckers are still like 10-20 years away from that kind of sophistication.

Based on what? What knowledge brought you to ISIS and that timeframe?

>>35097220
It's probably the software and some expensive hardware (cameras) and R&D.

>>35097220
A gyro-stabilized aviation EO/IR pod is, at it's cheapest, $250,000

File: shuttleCOck.jpg (1MB, 3000x1997px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x1997px

>>35097267
Meanwhile if it was on the consumer market would be much cheaper.

>>35097252
No its the way government contracts work. Crony capitalism is an understatement.

>>35097251
There are liveleak vids of them using drones to drop grenades in Syria. So it cant be much longer till they really gain sophistication.

>https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d76_1496773253

>https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1ee_1487941582

>>35097598
That doesn't really mean anything, everything they're using is just off the shelf stuff.

>>35097598
That IS on the consumer market numbnuts

>>35097686
>ISIS deployed functional air-force using off the self Chinese toys
Maeks you think.

>>35096233
That's what IsIs is doing, grenade drones.
But we're talking US military here, they have big boy drones with big boy payloads.

File: rts1f1s-100621602-primary.idge.jpg (49KB, 620x413px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 620x413px

>>35097756
Well aviation toys are specifically expensive mostly due to government regulation and low production.

>>35097763
Yeah wait till antifa creates the need for an uber police state.

>>35097686
And the US DARPA super expensive contract stuff wont be able to keep up. Although they will manage to keep squeezing out tax dollars for a few more decades.

telescope> drone with anything less than a 15 mile range.

File: 81be9c530b71d505d779347e4750e0f7.jpg (429KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 900x600px

>>35097901
wouldnt it just be better to carry a pdw and a then send out your drone for longer engagments?

>>35097952
A drone takes a significant amount of time to deploy and utilize when it comes to actual combat. With a gun you get them in line of sight an pull a lever.

The nature of warfare for us now is essentially seek and destroy, a drone would be good for that. But in all out war I still don't think equipping any more than 1/100 soldiers with a drone would have a purpose.

Likewise we have been in an area with miles of line of sight for a long time. HOW THE FUCK WILL DRONES EVEN WORK IN THE JUNGLE. You would have to train MASTER drone pilots and you also have to fly below the tree line, best case scenario you can only see 30 feet of jack all anyway.

>>35098011
>HOW THE FUCK WILL DRONES EVEN WORK IN THE JUNGLE
machine learning?

>>35098054
so how many millions of dollars will go into drones smashing against trees before they stop kek? It would be better to go ahead and start setting up an array of super good spy satellites. that can send live information and somehow have infrared

>>35098011
>With a gun you get them in line of sight an pull a lever.
But doing that you put yourself in the engagement envelope of enemies guns. So we see that combat 99% of the time degrades to the "we sit in the cover enemy sits in the cover and we spray bullets in the general direction of enemy not having each other in line of sight and not hitting anything" Drones allow to asymmetrically engage enemy without putting yourself at the risk of return fire.

File: 109299-36f7c1a8-f064-11e3-aad6-e5c45a718cb3-730x430.jpg (32KB, 730x430px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 730x430px

>>35098070
>so how many millions of dollars will go into drones smashing against trees before they stop kek

As much as they think they can squeeze out of tax payers? The software could be developed with "cheap" drones.

>>35097220
>military industrial complex
military industrial university complex.

stop giving the research arm a fucking pass.

File: landscape-1455125564-trail-drone1.jpg (142KB, 980x490px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 980x490px

>>35098070
Some machine learning stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPcHucV2GeQ

>>35098115
The software and hardware are probably already commercially available, the government development program would still probably cost hundreds of millions and be riddled with problems.

>>35098136
true


I also saw something about real life heart beat sensors and interior scanners for assault teams but cant find it now. They can always use those x-ray scanners they use in New York though and also it would be advantageous to have drones that just automatically scan the perimeter around troops and inside buildings and stuff. If the drones had little grenades or guns on them that would also be a big plus but detract from range so I guess specific models would have weapons only.

But at least one thing we can agree on is that it would be expensive and the fact it would be developed by the DOD would just make it like 10x more expensive.

Thats why i think we're still a few decades out before this kind of thing really makes a difference. A really crafty terror group or crime group could make some boutique shit and wreck havoc though.

>>35098101
wouldn't equipping guys with short range guided vertical missile launchers be better? I have no idea what im fucking talking about by the way. Would the ideal weaponized drone drop its load or just blow up?

>>35098323
those cost 75 thousnad + each

File: CIA.jpg (40KB, 615x409px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 615x409px

>>35097822
You're a big boy

>>35096778
Currently, mini quads with 5 inch props and 4S batteries have a flight time of about 4 minutes and aren't too happy if you load them up heavier than ~700 grams. RC airplanes have a surprisingly short takeoff run, and in most cases can be hand launched.

>>35096188
can't argue that triangulation to spot drones being shot down would be helpful as hell but...

the drones are so hackable it's not funny

>>35099377
>encrytped signal
problem solved

>>35098323
>>35098848
Those are called mortars, gents. Combined with a Raven for spotting, shit's easy.

>>35098984
U U U U

>>35099368
>4min
Maybe if you're using a 200C battery running the hell out of it constantly
I can run my butterkwad Alien with 2350kv motors for ~10 minutes and even then I'm only discharging to about 14.6 v
If you load them up, just make sure you jump up the proportional and derivative in tuning so it doesn't oscillate

In terms of CQB, nothing would be better than two or three mini quads running alleys and doorways checking for people and IEDs before you send actual troops in

>>35099422
lol ever heard of bandwidth. You'd be lucky to have more than 20 or so aircraft up with comms and telemetry without interference. Now youre adding network lag and assuming any military electronics work, which they literally never do.

>>35101162
if it's just meant to be within LOS of a rifleman, you can probably get away with a frequency hopping system in the SHF range. as long as you're not transmitting the complete collection of all of your retarded posts across the link, you should be fine.

File: DroneInAction-DukeRobotics-1200x1000-1-uai-516x430.jpg (71KB, 516x430px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 516x430px

>>35096188

>the jews built a drone that can compensate for recoil and accurately fire everything from small arms to an SR-25 sniper rifle, to a grenade launcher, ground troops are obsolete

>>35102488
But can it loiter for more than 30 minutes? No, so it's worthless for replacing ground troops.

Blow it out your ass.

>>35102516

what about a drone fleet like the pic faggot, the idea is to swarm the enemy and have a total of 0 casualties, not use drones as ground troops

>>35097220
Part of the problem is that the military prefers everything be US made, and robotics is a field of integrating lots of parts, most of which is saturated with chinesium

File: 21dd35850d33ed1181c3b9e4156ccea1--hornet-flying-drones[1].jpg (181KB, 736x1089px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 736x1089px

>>35096188
Old - main reason they're not issued to everyone is because 90% of them would get broken before being used:

>>35096709
Drones take less logistical upkeep and preparation then an Airborne Combat Control aircraft. You don't need a FOB ATC or a service crew for a skyward angle and it's less visible and auditable.

>>35097901
Unless you need to see around a corner or the other side of a hill

>>35096188
They're already in use by the US military. Limited use, but they do exist. Single-rotor remotely controlled drones about 6 inches long. Scout areas too small or dense for Reapers or some other large RC plane

>>35103453
Yep. My unit has them and I'm in the nasty guard so I wonder what active duty has.

>>35103651
Chances are tier 1 has gear that grunts will get in 10-20 years. Scary shit, man.

>>35102516
can an F35 loiter for more than 30 minutes?

checkmate vegans

File: 800px-Raven_UAV.jpg (210KB, 800x1190px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 800x1190px

>>35099428
>Raven
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroVironment_RQ-11_Raven#/media/File:Raven_UAV.jpg

>100k each

Military industrial complex is designed for 1 think and that is to get tax monies.

File: Capture.png (2KB, 303x50px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 303x50px

>>35105073
>15k ft service ceiling
>90 min endurance
>60 mph top speed
>gimbaled IR night vision camera

Show me another drone that does this cheaper.

Also, pic very much related (literally from the site you linked), it puts them AT MOST at $40k each. So show me another drone that does all of the above for less than $40k, that will actually work in under military conditions.

>dey yust want tek tax moneh
Fuck off

File: GRIPEN_EXPLODE.webm (1MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x720px

>>35105206
>dey yust want tek tax moneh
So do you think that the review boards at the DOD really hold manufacturers accountable and reward the most effective designs?

Sure there is R&D costs but they are paying for bloated engineering firms instead of lightweight, agile teams motivated to innovate.

The raven shouldnt cost more than a REALLY nice RC plane with a camera on it. The development costs could have been an order of magnitude lower even in 2001. Dont fucking kid yourself.

The 1/3 scale gripen that blew up with a micro turbine cost 35k, which is still too expensive:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/a26780/this-35000-rc-plane-crashed-right-into-the-ground/

Youre a fucking idiot if you really think that most of the public sector are selfless civil servants. They are parasites. Or at least most of them, and this is because the system rewards that kind of behavior and actually punishes people trying to do the right thing. Politicians that try to do the right thing are pariahs because the parasites are afraid that they will ruin their gig.

I worked in the public sector in Europe for a few years and we tried to replace department whos responsibility was scheduling vacations with a software system that worked online and would actually do the job better and save money, but the head of the program did not allow the software to be implemented because he didnt want to eliminate those jobs. It is cronyism at it's finest and true free marketism would weed out this kind of behavior.

File: hqdefault.jpg (12KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 480x360px

>>35105206
And i meant to also say that the Raven is literally just a propeller RC plane with a camera on it. It's really nice but not 40k nice. Mayybe like 10k in 2001 but there is no reason something like that couldnt be much cheaper if it was designed and produced today.

Also want to highlight some of the corruption in the DOD:

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

You know those stories of 600 dollar hammers in afghanistan werent made up? Some of them were exaggerated but its not just a bunch of liberals making shit up and that kind of thing really does happen. I have listened to interviews of Gov. contractors in afghanistan and they said they were just there to get paid to do nothing basically.

Just because something is a meme or gets exagerated does not mean it's entirely false. One thing the DOD does well is get cheap M4s supposedly.

Prices are incredibly bloated in aviation in general and although civilian transport is very safe and affordable the actual hardware is sometimes overly expensive and there is not enough innovation.

If the prices were a bit more competitive for government contracts our troops would have better equipment and if the contracts werent based on cronyism so much then private entrepreneurs would have an easier time getting contracts but the problem is that lockmart shills make sure they get all the contracts and the contracts are as expensive as possible. As corny as it sounds even Trump proved that a few million could be saved here and there by proper negotiation and competition.

You cannot deny this is a problem in the public sector and your patriotic "no bs" attitude does not serve you or the public and is illogical.

Should have continued to buy DJI.

Should have bought Chinese.