Drone Improvements

Post Reply New Topic

But is the problem the drones themselves, or the way we've been using them? I think it's the latter, I mean the problem isn't the fact that we're using remote controlled bombers, the problem is that we're using them indiscriminately and based on flimsy at best evidence, hence my improvement schemes. I don't think we can put the genie back in the bottle, so I'm trying to think of ways to work with it.

Just because the US doesn't take overt action doesn't mean they're not involved, the US and its allies in Turkey and Arab Gulf have been involved in the Syrian war from its very start. It is very likely that is what got our ambassador killed in Libya as he was speculated to be a CIA agent(which is illegal I might add) overseeing the transfer of weapons and fighters from the rebels there on thru Turkey to Syria.

We've not fighting a conventional war, we're not fighting an opposing army from some foreign invader. Its a battle of ideology, we have to win the hearts and minds and they don't want us there. The Taliban in Afghanistan is much more popular to American military, the Taliban as brutal as they may be are still from there and share more with with them than we do. Most people in Afghanistan have no idea what 9/11 is, they just see America as another crusader imperialist power coming to invade and occupy them just as Russians and British before us.

But you may be right in saying that it saved the lives of troops on the ground just as our carpet bombing campaign against the Vietcong and North Vietnam were intended to do but it caused so much collateral damage and is completely counter productive to our mission. My point isn't that we need ground troops, we need to rethink our entire mission and involvement. If it isn't worth sacrificing American lives then we shouldn't be there, we shouldn't go to war unless there poses a direct threat to us.

Khmer Rouge were in Cambodia, and the US didn't directly support them as it was the height of the cold war, and they were communists. I think you mean that carpet bombing helped recruit more soldier to the KR.

North Vietnamese have a milder version of Communism, and Khmer Rouge were xenophobic nationalists. This is why the Vietnamese removed them becuase they were causing insatiability in the region.

it is funny, that is a non-western intervention, yet doesn't get criticized. However the Cambodian, generally like to get along. The same cannot be said of some of the regions of North Africa, Arabian Peninsular, etc. This is becuase there is has been an existential conflict from the battle of Karbula, and sub-conflicts throughout the centuries.

Vietnamese also are not Maoist, and don't particularly like China. They are doing better economically than the other south east Asian countries except Thailand. Cambodia's corruption is a serious problem.

What is interesting for those who go there, is they are very honest about all the issue, and happy to talk. This is in stark contrast to the double think and self censorship ship you get in China, especially those serving the public.

This is a vastly different type of drone. You are talking not about the craft most associated with military drone. As in the larger one that fly at altitudes where they are not visible in the sky, and are reasonably large.

Even the best snipers at that range would not be able to hit these targets from, not even considering doing it remotely from a moving aircraft.

So I guess you are talking about smaller craft, at lower altitude. That may get shot down with RPG, but might be difficult to spot or hit? Cheaper, but more of them? You would need some serious steadying technology. You probably would have to take multiple shots, a sniper does.

It is good that you are thinking about the ethics thought.

How about a drone that lands, has terrain capability, night vision, and has sniper and 50 cal machine gun capability?

This is similar tactics to special forces. Like SAS using helicopters, quad-bikes, attack and withdraw. But instead you don't have to use soldiers, or land so far away.

The US supported the Khmer Rouge because they opposed the North Vietnamese and were allied with China who at that point had split off from the Soviets, it goes to show you how meaningless the Vietnam War was as it really wasn't about stopping the spread of Communism in Southeast Asia but rather just an immoral realpolitik battle between the US and Soviet Union. The Vietnamese would fight off a Chinese invasion not long after their liberation of Cambodia. The US and China made it so the Khmer Rouge was the UN representative for Cambodia until 1993.

Maybe a new VTOL type of drone with a semiauto .50 BMG rifle built just for it. It would take and precise automatic stabilization system with servos to keep the rifle on target since aircraft could not maintain the stability needed. It would have to fly within range (preferably within 1 mile) then go into a hover behind some kind of cover (manmade structure or natural ridge, etc.) as not to easily be seen.

The ability to aim the rifle remotely and compensate for trajectory, wind drift, and coriolis affect while maintaining stability through the shot and being able to reacquire the target for follow up shots (if necessary) and to verify mission success would be the hardest part of designing this.
Of course, the loiter time in the target area that it would require would put the vehicle at greater risk of detection and destruction than the kind of drone used now.

This is what I'm talking about, would solve all the stabilizing and accuracy issues associated with firing from a moving drone at a moving target, a computer could easily keep a laser on target to guide the bullet in, or like I also suggested, a gravity weapon similar to a lawn dart could simply be dropped.

Here's a VTOL-concept from Lockheed Martin, involving a minigun:

That is interesting. Though you do need some stabilizing for the laser.

I think this won't replace a predator drone, but I'm sure it is something that is being considered.

I think for moving target like like an SUV moving through the desert, they would use a something like a predator.

I think you are right about overuse of such drones in built up areas. But used more selectively they have uses.

There are also munitions and sub-munitions specially design for Armored vehicle and tanks, which ISIS has a lot of at the moment. If drones are efficient enough they can do the work of traditional aircraft.

Love drones.
Here is the one I fly!

Known as a Phantom.. a very popular little drone

They have? I don't think so, but any reliable information to the contrary would be appreciated.

The Islamic State have everything that the Iraqi Army left behind...

Now, add on a recoilless rifle...

I think small drones are going to be a major part of making a modern 4th gen. army, along with lightweight combat exoskeletons, improved body armour and head-up displays. Possibly also supplemental oxygen. But the soldiers have to be able to continue to fight well if an EMP goes off.

The problem with a guided bullet is the burst time for correction is relatively short, due to the speed, and capacity. I think in a traditional sniper situation it make sense but from the sky I suspect it would not take much to go of course to the degree that any correction is not viable.

Therefore it would make sense to slow it down, and make it slightly bigger.

We are not talking slow here, just slower than a bullet.

Last edited by 0_equals_true on 19 Feb 2015, 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

It is the one of main reasons why they have been so successful. If they were just Toyota with rocket launchers, those are a dime a dozen, with every militia in the region. The other region was money from gulf state. This was all reported on, and is on their own videos. American funded a tanks and weapons the Iraqi handed over.

This is what is so momentarily stupid about the situation, never learning from the past. "My enemy's enemy is my friend" are the famous last words.

I'm pretty sure they don't have any operational tanks or AFVs.

It is well documented that the Iraqi army abandoned them to ISIS, and they were use in the battle of Kobane.

They not only have tank, APC, they also have anti aircraft, grad missiles, and howitza.
http://www.dailysabah.com/mideast/2014/ ... tory-grows

Many of them have been struck by coalition forces.
http://defensetech.org/2015/01/07/us-ai ... -58-tanks/

There are driving them in their videos, in their own propaganda videos.