Drones, the Air Littoral, and the Looming Irrelevance of the USAF

[Kirkhill]

And apparently drones can happen anywhere, including Langley, Virginia

Mysterious Drones Swarmed Langley AFB For Weeks

The unidentified drones were such an issue that assets were called in from around the government, including a NASA WB-57 high-altitude jet.

www.twz.com

 

[Kirkhill]

Who's winning?

Red Sea Turkey Shoot: Allied Warships Down Dozens Of Drones Within Hours

Allied warships and aircraft repulsed a mass drone attack in the Red Sea, but it's still an ominous sign that the Houthis aren't backing down.

www.twz.com

 

[Kirkhill]

The cost of countering drones....

Army aims to equip a division with hand-held counter-drone gear

But one expert said the service may have underestimated just how much that will cost.

www.defenseone.com

The Army’s 2025 budget request includes $13.5 million for hand-held anti-drone devices to equip a division and $54.2 million for backpack-size jammers, an Army spokesperson said Thursday.

The $13.5 million will buy 20 Modi devices, 10 Smart Shooter devices, 10 Bal Chatri devices, and 20 Dronebuster devices.

But equipping a division may require more, said Samuel Bendett of the Center for Naval Analysis, an expert on Ukraine and Russia’s use of drones in Ukraine.

“At the very least, each platoon should probably have [a hand-held anti-drone device], based on what we’re seeing in Ukraine so far,” he said.

Effectively the US Army is looking at spending $68 million to buy each combat battalion in the division 4 Jammers, 1 RF detector and 1 fire control device for one rifle.

As the article mentions the scale should probably be increased to allow for each platoon to be covered, and that would have to include CPs, artillery troops/platoons and coverage for the logistics areas.

If you multiplied by 10 and spent $680 million per division you would still be short. You might want to double that again to $1,360,000,000 to kit out one division.

10 divisions and you are looking at a $10 to 20 Billion expenditure. And that is just for the short range stuff and doesn't account for MRAD, SHORAD, M-SHORAD, ManPADs and RWS on all vehicles to counter the aerial threat.

Meanwhile

 

[dimsum]

That’s assuming you want kinetic effects for C-UAS. That may not be the most appropriate way of mitigating them, esp around populated (domestic) areas.

 

[Kirkhill]

That’s assuming you want kinetic effects for C-UAS. That may not be the most appropriate way of mitigating them, esp around populated (domestic) areas.

Could we stipulate that both will be required and situationally dependent?

It is why I like the latest Rheinmetall Turrets that incorporate kinetics in the form of traditional cannons and SAMs as well as Directed Energy Lasers and have them backed by an EW suite for the close in game.

 

[Kirkhill]

Further to these -



This -

Single-molecule electric motor - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The single-molecule electric motor is an electrically operated synthetic molecular motor made from a single butyl methyl sulphide molecule.[1] The molecule is adsorbed onto a copper (111) single-crystal piece by chemisorption.[1] The motor, the world's smallest electric motor,[2] is just a nanometer (billionth of a meter) across[3] (60 000 times smaller than the thickness of a human hair). It was developed by the Sykes group and scientists at the Tufts University School of Arts and Sciences and published online September 4, 2011.[4]

Single-molecule motors have been demonstrated before. These motors were either powered by chemical reactions[5] or by light.[6] This is the first experimental demonstration of electrical energy successfully coupling to directed molecular rotation.[3][7]

The flight control regime is identical for the toy and the Malloy T650 and both rely on electric motors. Electric motors can be scaled up and down and the smallest electric motor is

• C5H12S

2D
3D

I suggest that flight is cheap.

 

[KevinB]

That’s assuming you want kinetic effects for C-UAS. That may not be the most appropriate way of mitigating them, esp around populated (domestic) areas.

One aspect that no one seems to be accepting well is that all C-UAS methods are somewhat kinetic, as if successful the UAS comes out of the sky…

 

[Colin Parkinson]

That’s assuming you want kinetic effects for C-UAS. That may not be the most appropriate way of mitigating them, esp around populated (domestic) areas.

EW defences might have other economic impacts on the population. Which is better than having bits of projectiles falling from the sky.

 

[KevinB]

EW defences might have other economic impacts on the population. Which is better than have bits of projectiles falling from the sky.

There is no free lunch.

EW measures will need to cover a wide range of frequencies, or use rather dangerous levels of energy, which can have a lot of negative consequences, including a lot of unforeseen impacts.

DE is likely the least dangerous to the mass population, as it has the highest potential to also affect any potential payload away from civilians, but the resultant debris can still be present and dangerous.

Any C-UAS plan needs a risk assessment as you don’t want the ‘medicine’ to be worse than the threat.

 

[Kirkhill]

There is no free lunch.

EW measures will need to cover a wide range of frequencies, or use rather dangerous levels of energy, which can have a lot of negative consequences, including a lot of unforeseen impacts.

DE is likely the least dangerous to the mass population, as it has the highest potential to also affect any potential payload away from civilians, but the resultant debris can still be present and dangerous.

Any C-UAS plan needs a risk assessment as you don’t want the ‘medicine’ to be worse than the threat.

The advantage of locating control towers and terminals in the middle of large, open expanses on which you can land aircraft.

Lots of free ground for the debris to land on. And if there is evidence of a concerted effort on infrastructure extending beyond the perimeter then I am pretty sure that the locals won't be worried about a bit more celestial debris falling on their heads. Or having their WiFi screwed up for a bit.

 

[KevinB]

The advantage of locating control towers and terminals in the middle of large, open expanses on which you can land aircraft.

Lots of free ground for the debris to land on. And if there is evidence of a concerted effort on infrastructure extending beyond the perimeter then I am pretty sure that the locals won't be worried about a bit more celestial debris falling on their heads. Or having their WiFi screwed up for a bit.

If you want to screw with an airport, a UAS (or a swarm or them) isn’t a very practical option. There are a lot of easier methods.

The problem with airports out in the middle of nowhere is that it’s annoying to get to them, and despite ones best intentions, soon they end up not in the middle of nowhere.

 

[dapaterson]

The problem with airports out in the middle of nowhere is that it’s annoying to get to them, and despite ones best intentions, soon they end up not in the middle of nowhere.

Mirabel disproves your claim.

 

[GR66]

Another development in the ever evolving cat and mouse game between UAVs and EW counter-measures:

Ukrainian troops successfully use autonomous FPV drone for the first time

Ukrainian activist and volunteer, Serhii Sternenko, has shared video footage showcasing the use of a new FPV drone equipped with autonomous targeting capabilities. The drone reportedly demonstrated its ability to strike targets without direct operator commands, marking a new milestone in...

defence-blog.com

 

[Kirkhill]

If you want to screw with an airport, a UAS (or a swarm or them) isn’t a very practical option. There are a lot of easier methods.

The problem with airports out in the middle of nowhere is that it’s annoying to get to them, and despite ones best intentions, soon they end up not in the middle of nowhere.

What is nowhere and how far out is your perimeter?

Mirabel is in the middle of nowhere but even Dorval and Pearson have long approaches from their cities. As do most modern airports.

Drones may or may not be a practical option, and there may be other ways to screw with operations but I am far from the only person thinking that:

a) drones are a threat to airports and
b) drones are a threat to domestic infrastructure.

As you note airports tend to cause people to cluster around them. That clustering effect also makes the airport a good node from which to establish a local defence structure.

 

[KevinB]

I’m not going to disagree, but I’m also not going to expand on the topic here.

 

[Kirkhill]

I’m not going to disagree, but I’m also not going to expand on the topic here.

Ooooo!

 

[Kirkhill]

I missed this one from back in October - Valkyrie variants.

“Multiple” New Versions Of The XQ-58 Valkyrie In The Works

Kratos has also added the Fifth Generation Aerial Target (5GAT) drone to its roster of unmanned aircraft types.

www.twz.com

In keeping with GAA's Gambits

General Atomics' Gambit Drones To Have Different Airframes With Common 'Cores'

General Atomics is pitching a modular family of drones intended to perform various missions alongside manned aircraft that all use a common chassis-like 'core.'

www.twz.com

And development continues.

XQ-58 Valkyrie Drone Family Has Grown To Five Variants

Kratos says the capabilities of its flagship XQ-58 drone line are expanding substantially as it works to push down unit costs.

www.twz.com

....

I have a sense that the legacy airframe suppliers are working hard to both catch up to Kratos and GAA and also working to push the price of the CCA solution up as well.

The legacy types need to do something to support their share prices.

 

[dimsum]

I missed this one from back in October - Valkyrie variants.

“Multiple” New Versions Of The XQ-58 Valkyrie In The Works

Kratos has also added the Fifth Generation Aerial Target (5GAT) drone to its roster of unmanned aircraft types.

www.twz.com

In keeping with GAA's Gambits

General Atomics' Gambit Drones To Have Different Airframes With Common 'Cores'

General Atomics is pitching a modular family of drones intended to perform various missions alongside manned aircraft that all use a common chassis-like 'core.'

www.twz.com

And development continues.

XQ-58 Valkyrie Drone Family Has Grown To Five Variants

Kratos says the capabilities of its flagship XQ-58 drone line are expanding substantially as it works to push down unit costs.

www.twz.com

....

I have a sense that the legacy airframe suppliers are working hard to both catch up to Kratos and GAA and also working to push the price of the CCA solution up as well.

The legacy types need to do something to support their share prices.

Considering there hasn’t been an actual sale for the XQ-58 yet, Kratos is really going guns blazing…

 

[Kirkhill]

Considering there hasn’t been an actual sale for the XQ-58 yet, Kratos is really going guns blazing…

Perhaps they know something?

 

[Kirkhill]

Ukraine Rolls Out Target-Seeking Terminator Drones

Ukraine is now building autonomous attack drones in large numbers. These do not need human pilots, a game-changing technology with implications far beyond this conflict.

www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org

Interesting cargo for a larger "drone". Not a new idea but the Ukrainians seem to be making a practice of finding dirt cheap 80% solutions.

When the unit is jammed it goes autonomous.