![www.forbes.com](/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fimageio.forbes.com%2Fspecials-images%2Fimageserve%2F66ac9e1a398aceffe1425288%2F0x0.jpg%3Fformat%3Djpg%26height%3D900%26width%3D1600%26fit%3Dbounds&hash=92023cd82ad1894142eaaf613d12a5fc&return_error=1)
Jam-Proof Fiber Optic Drone Testing In Ukraine
The HCX drone communicates via a fiber-optic cable, making it immune to all electronic warfare. This makes it valuable in the densely-jammed airspace of Ukraine.
![www.forbes.com](/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.forbesimg.com%2F48X48-F.png&hash=9622ebb6fc240d125fb73af3342314b9&return_error=1)
I don't get why you'd want to use a C130 to deploy the Hero 120 given their range of 40km, with that short of standoff range seems like a good way to lose a C130 except if its in pervasive environments. And those type of environments allow AC-130s to operate.![]()
United States Explores Possible Launches of Uvision Hero 120 Loitering Munitions from C-130 Aircraft
United States Explores Possible Launches of Uvision Hero 120 Loitering Munitions from C-130 Aircraftwww.armyrecognition.com
One smells beancounter logic in action here....I don't get why you'd want to use a C130 to deploy the Hero 120 given their range of 40km, with that short of standoff range seems like a good way to lose a C130 except if its in pervasive environments. And those type of environments allow AC-130s to operate.
When drug gangs and bored shitposters all have FPVs, do you really think there are environments that AC-130s can operate? (note visual target cognition is rapidly proliferating, and big flying thingy spamming tracers is not a difficult problem)I don't get why you'd want to use a C130 to deploy the Hero 120 given their range of 40km, with that short of standoff range seems like a good way to lose a C130 except if its in pervasive environments. And those type of environments allow AC-130s to operate.
I'm not certain what altitudes AC-130s typically orbit at, but the sort of cheap drones those groups could access may not reach so high. But regardless the gunship is a very specific niche aircraft and its continued utility or lack-thereof is going to be determined by developments elsewhere. If we can develop and field DIRCM capable of spoofing much faster man-portable SAMs then doing the same to fry the optics of these slower drones is certainly within the realm of possibility. It seems like the greater problem is detecting them without the big thermal signature that comes from a rocket motor. But such solutions are going to be a necessity given the threat not just to military aircraft but anything taking off or landing on a known airfield. It's the same risk the proliferation of man-portable SAMs represents but far easier to obtain. And of course, those airfields are going to need their own systems just so everyone doesn't pilot kamikaze drones into millions of dollars' worth of parked aircraft.When drug gangs and bored shitposters all have FPVs, do you really think there are environments that AC-130s can operate? (note visual target cognition is rapidly proliferating, and big flying thingy spamming tracers is not a difficult problem)
I guess there is uncontacted stone age people in the amazons
As threatening to helicopters (or anything without sufficient support) as this present battlefield may be, I don't think abandoning new hardware that likely would be more adaptable to this environment was a smart choice. In my view trying to use something like FARA to work alongside and coordinate manned and unmanned assets makes more sense than giving that job to AH-64 crews who might be overloaded having to do that in addition to their primary task. More than ever before situational awareness is all-important, and designing a new rotorcraft with that in mind is probably more efficient.When I see that it's clear why FARA was cancelled. It's a different battlefield, and simply updating with reduced RCS isn't going to change a thing. Heli operations are going to require different tactics and thinking.
Why would FARA crews be any less overloaded?As threatening to helicopters (or anything without sufficient support) as this present battlefield may be, I don't think abandoning new hardware that likely would be more adaptable to this environment was a smart choice. In my view trying to use something like FARA to work alongside and coordinate manned and unmanned assets makes more sense than giving that job to AH-64 crews who might be overloaded having to do that in addition to their primary task. More than ever before situational awareness is all-important, and designing a new rotorcraft with that in mind is probably more efficient.
View: https://x.com/sternenko/status/1821819139213635602Another defeat of a Russian helicopter using FPV! Soldiers of the M2 unit of the Special Operations Center of the SBU in Kurshchyna were able to hit another Russian helicopter with your FPV. This time, the Mi-8 was hit in the tail by a drone with a powerful fragmentation warhead.
Aftermath of Drone Strike on Lipetsk Airbase -- Over 700 Glide Bombs Destroyed in Ammo Dump
Why would a receiver give away position? Should it not be completely passive?