undefined

points

[-]

> Drone means foam wings, plastic body, propellers, cheap camera, simple inertial navigation, maybe GPS, maybe 10-30 kilogram payload.

You need to seriously upgrade your level of knowledge about what is available in terms of drones today.

by throwawayffffas10 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Do you mean stuff like FP-5 Flamingo? These are really cruise missiles. Why would you call it a suicide drone? Because it has wings? Tomahawks have wings. Because the design is based on a target drone, so what the capabilities are very much inline with munitions we call cruise missiles.

The drone/guided missile divide is really about dividing a continuum which on one end has foam wings and raspberry pie equivalents wrapped in tin foil and on the other million dollar tomahawks. The distinction is the price tag and the capabilities really.

Otherwise both are long range guided munitions.

by jacquesm9 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Flamingo is pretty close to a cruise missile in many ways. You correctly observe that this is a continuum but most but not all drones have props whereas all missiles are either rocket based or jet engine based and missiles tend to be a lot faster and do not allow for a change of plan after launch.

So no. But the Lyutyi (sp?), the FP-1 and the Nynja all qualify as drones (and there are many, many more, it's a veritable zoo) if you make that distinction, as do all of the sea-borne gear.

by caminante11 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

I didn't take it as exhaustive.

While you're alluding to high-end reapers/etc., the majority of drones in the Ukraine-Russia conflict have foam wings and low cost components.

by jacquesm10 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

The ones that are decimating the russian oil industry are a bit more impressive than that. The foam wing ones are mostly Shaheds, the Ukrainian ones tend to be made of various plastics and/or fibreglass or composites for the more specialized stuff.

by watwut5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Imo foam wings and low cost components is very impressive. Low cost easy production is an actual tangible benefit. If it destroys the target and is easy cheap to make, it is a better arm.

by FpUser11 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

>"10-30 kilogram payload" - for carrier it is probably a moscito bite

by throwawayffffas10 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Yeah not so much for it's radars, or for the f35 parked on the flight deck, which may be you know loaded with thousands of gallons of fuel and hundreds of pounds of missiles and bombs.

Sure, it won't sink it, but operations may be disrupted, for hours to days.

by onlypassingthru6 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Days? If a laundry fire can take out a carrier for weeks, how long do you think a flight deck repair takes?

by baq5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

It was a laundry fire on a ballistic trajectory ;)

by CamperBob210 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Depends on whether they can bullseye the laundry chute.

by mixmastamyk10 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home, they're not much bigger than two meters. ;-)