Replies

Have you been seeing the articles about deploying drone swarms from fighters?

Lots and lots of them. Again, math is hard. Take a simple GPS-guided bomb - cost about $15k, with (Mk-82) over 300 pounds of explosive payload. Now, put an engine on it ($150k), and some sort of nav system that is more than small corrections to a ballistic path, (another $150k). Put wings and control surfaces (again, for more than small corrections to a ballistic path), and something to drive the control surfaces (hydraulics?, electric motors?), and something to feed the engine fuel (pumps). In the end, you've taken the GBU-12 and multiplied the cost by two orders of magnitude.

What is the value? What do a 'swarm' of small UAVs do that a single (or a few - one fighter payload's worth) accurate bomb cannot do?

Or, if it's considered for air-to-air, then the same problems apply. What makes some notional 'small' UAV more effective than an AIM-120 that already has more effective kinematic range than sensor range? Do you take out the sensors on the missile? If so, how do you guide it?

The biggest problem most of these commenters have is no understanding of where the costs are in modern tactical aircraft. The airframe cost is small (less than 25%). All the money is in avionics and systems (most of which capability, e.g. electrical and cooling goes to support the avionics). One should consider an AIM-120 or JDAM as the unit for the 'swarm' of UAVs. Options would have to show an advantage over those, not over manned aircraft.

Lots and lots of them. Again, math is hard. Take a simple GPS-guided bomb - cost about $15k, with (Mk-82) over 300 pounds of explosive payload. Now, put an engine on it ($150k), and some sort of nav system that is more than small corrections to a ballistic path, (another $150k). Put wings and control surfaces (again, for more than small corrections to a ballistic path), and something to drive the control surfaces (hydraulics?, electric motors?), and something to feed the engine fuel (pumps). In the end, you've taken the GBU-12 and multiplied the cost by two orders of magnitude.

Not sure where you are going here. I don't think anyone has suggested anything close to this.

What is the value? What do a 'swarm' of small UAVs do that a single (or a few - one fighter payload's worth) accurate bomb cannot do?

Network. Relay communications, find targets of opportunity, loiter, infiltrate, and so forth. I'm not sure you've been keeping up with what is going on in drone technology. You worry about keeping communications links open, but with enough of these things, you can take out any jamming system.

That's the whole point. These things are cheap, and you can throw thousands of them into a conflict. Getting jammed? They can track the jammer and zap it. Air to Air missiles? Put a hundred drones in it's path with proximity fuses.

The potential of drone swarms is absolutely terrifying, because they can take out soldiers, tanks, aircraft, missiles, or whatever.

Here's 500 drones being controlled for amusement.

This technology is not yet fully developed for war, but people are working on it. When this stuff is mature, It will be another pivot point in the history of military evolution.

Or, if it's considered for air-to-air, then the same problems apply. What makes some notional 'small' UAV more effective than an AIM-120 that already has more effective kinematic range than sensor range? Do you take out the sensors on the missile? If so, how do you guide it?

You could laser guide drones (line of sight) from sensors on the aircraft till they get close enough to use their own sensors to track another aircraft. You can laser guide to ground targets within line of sight, and you can make your Unmanned vehicles small enough that they would be even harder to hit with a missile.

There are lots of methodologies that could be developed along these lines. I've seen drone designs that land and recharge. I've seen em that flap their wings like birds. I've seen designs that land in trees. I've seen insect sized designs.

For your amusement. Unrealistic, but not that far away from what is actually possible.