Drones and how to kill them?

With fibre-optic guided drones becoming more common, perhaps there should be other means of detection?

Would a LIDAR or MMW radar system be able to detect small drones?
 
Jason Dykstra (Wyvern) said:
With fibre-optic guided drones becoming more common, perhaps there should be other means of detection?

Would a LIDAR or MMW radar system be able to detect small drones?
Click to expand...
I'd say yes, Anduril's Lattice counter UAS system can detect targets like birds so I'd say drones would be detected as well. Not sure what system they are using as a means of detection.

Edit - They use long range radar and MWIR according to their promo video.
 
TomcatViP said:
Seems helicopters are well suited for direct gun engagement of low cost drones (at least with some gun smoke ventilation). It´s great for the high speed designs that went neglected lately. A Cobra, for example, would fair well here probably with her ability to dive at high speed while still a stable gun platform.
Click to expand...
With the right improvements to sensors and weaponry you might be able to adapt a 30mm autocannon to fire the same smart airburst ammo as the interim Stryker air defense vehicle. The M230 chain gun is the parent design of the XM914 used on that particular vehicle.

Although faster-firing 20mm guns with their flatter trajectory would be good in their own right. Those Mi-8 crews are pretty much working with the bare minimum to take drones out with PK machine guns. I don't know the state of the Ukranian Mi-24 fleet but their four-barrel 12.7mm Gatling-type machine guns would probably be a huge improvement for this task. Mi-24 has got to be faster too.
 
Gets me thinking that the optional belly-mounted M134 minigun for the V-22s may have a use against the faster drones (400+kph).
 
Forest Green said:
Gets me thinking that the optional belly-mounted M134 minigun for the V-22s may have a use against the faster drones (400+kph).
Click to expand...
While I thought that was a .50cal, a .30cal MG is not going to be very effective against a metal skinned drone like you need to go that fast. Even with HEI ammo like the ShKAS.
 
Scott Kenny said:
While I thought that was a .50cal, a .30cal MG is not going to be very effective against a metal skinned drone like you need to go that fast. Even with HEI ammo like the ShKAS.
Click to expand...
Of course it will, a drone will definitely not be bulletproof against 7.62mm, certainly not against 4000rpm, why on Earth would you think that? You can also have a single-barrel .50cal MG however.
 
Forest Green said:
Of course it will, a drone will definitely not be bulletproof against 7.62mm, certainly not against 4000rpm, why on Earth would you think that? You can also have a single-barrel .50cal MG however.
Click to expand...
Impact angles.

In WW2, the people flying planes armed with rifle-caliber MGs noted that the bullets would often slide along the skin rather than penetrate, while heavier calibers would penetrate the skin. And remember, this is talking about 0.75-1mm skinning, not exactly thick stuff!

An A/N M2 or GAU19B (tribarrel gatling .50cal) is the minimum I'd want for engaging a 400kph drone.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Impact angles.

In WW2, the people flying planes armed with rifle-caliber MGs noted that the bullets would often slide along the skin rather than penetrate, while heavier calibers would penetrate the skin. And remember, this is talking about 0.75-1mm skinning, not exactly thick stuff!

An A/N M2 or GAU19B (tribarrel gatling .50cal) is the minimum I'd want for engaging a 400kph drone.
Click to expand...
How on Earth could they have determined that while flying? It's more the case that WWII aircraft could absorb a hell of a lot of bullets from smaller calibers, especially the larger aircraft due to the vast non-critical spaces. A small, compact drone packed with high explosive and fuel however, not so much. It should also be noted that WWII fighters were setup so that only 2 of 6 or 8 guns were actually pointed directly forwards to help pilots who were poor shots. Just examine what the M134 will do to a vehicle, I would not even fancy my chances against sustained close-range fire in an attack heli. Here are some videos:

View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/OuEAkBRmP-8

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbwXIfS2nEs

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04yMnMTSuvI
 
Manned aircraft of all types is about an order of magnitude too big for air superiority duties against lawnmowers. Personally I think a firebee class vehicle is what evolution should drive towards, if talking about reusable interceptors and not missiles with slower propulsion.

Helicopter AEW might be a thing though, since there is just about no operation too small for above horizon air defense in this era, regardless of airstrip availability.
 
Forest Green said:
How on Earth could they have determined that while flying?
Click to expand...
You mean aside from the tracers converging onto the aircraft and then sliding along the skin being visible to the pilots and on the gun cameras?

It was also determined on the ground when a plane came home covered with bullet slide marks instead of holes.


Forest Green said:
It's more the case that WWII aircraft could absorb a hell of a lot of bullets from smaller calibers, especially the larger aircraft due to the vast non-critical spaces. A small, compact drone packed with high explosive and fuel however, not so much. It should also be noted that WWII fighters were setup so that only 2 of 6 or 8 guns were actually pointed directly forwards to help pilots who were poor shots.
Click to expand...
No, aircraft wing guns were set to converge at a specific distance, usually 100-200 yards in front of the aircraft. So they'd shoot the group of whatever size (like 20-40" in diameter) and all 6 guns would put their groups on top of each other at that distance. Closer or farther, the group would be more oval or pill shaped.

Only the synchronized guns firing through a prop would fire directly forwards on a single-engined fighter.
 
Scott Kenny said:
You mean aside from the tracers converging onto the aircraft and then sliding along the skin being visible to the pilots and on the gun cameras?

It was also determined on the ground when a plane came home covered with bullet slide marks instead of holes.
Click to expand...
There were a lot of holes for every bullet mark I bet. Any actual evidence of this?

In any case, the heli/V-22 with the M134 would be above and to the side of the drone firing down at 4000rpm, there is no way in hell a drone could withstand that. Honestly, you'd think we were discussing a BB gun.
 
www.spacewar.com

MARSS Demonstrates CUAS Effectiveness in Extreme Middle East Conditions

London, UK (SPX) Sep 03, 2024 - In mid-August, MARSS successfully completed a counter-unmanned aerial system (CUAS) trial in the Middle East, demonstrating the capability to detect, track, classify, and neutralize a range of drone
www.spacewar.com

www.twz.com

Balloon-Based Sensor That Pinpoints Location Of Drone Operators Emerges In Ukraine

The Aero Azimuth is designed to detect and assist in engaging the drone controller, rather than the drone itself. The Aero Azimuth is designed to detect and assist in engaging the drone controller, rather than the drone itself.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23JtbyoJv8M
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Nice one.

Regarding the air bursting grenades launcher above (post #601), that would fit perfectly under the chin of an AH-1 (see the dual set Bell offered during Vietnam):

iu
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom