this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
129 points (91.1% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6623 readers
668 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Are they stupid?
r*ddit

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 71 points 6 months ago (2 children)
[–] DarkGamer@kbin.social 45 points 6 months ago (3 children)

The longest range wire-guided missiles in current use are limited to about 8 km (5.0 mi).

This blows my mind.

[–] sincle354@kbin.social 30 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Yom Kippur was mentioned in the article. Some documentary mentioned the hundreds of trails of wire you could find on the battlefield. Not related but related idea were missiles streaming carbon fibers to short out electrical stations during the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Missiles would be cooler if they didn't kill.

[–] borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I’ve read the same thing about the trails of wire all over the place in the Falklands also.

Also as someone who fired Javelins and TOWs in the Marine Corps, missiles are just fucking cool. I was always jealous of the SMAW guys tho bc they had a bigger kaboom on the firing side of things. Although that’s technically rocket I guess, but still cool.

[–] RobertoOberto@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago

Why hello there, Mr. 0352.

At least your MOS still exists. I was one of them SMAW guys, and now both my job and old unit have been deactivated. It makes me feel like even more of a dinosaur than I otherwise would when I talk to people about my time enlisted.

[–] exocrinous@startrek.website 2 points 6 months ago

Superhero with a shoulder mounted missile launcher like War Machine but they're Hawkeye's patented boxing glove missiles

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 10 points 6 months ago

Can't jam a missile getting a fucking telegraph.

[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

If I remember right the cable only runs for a fraction of that distance. The missile goes up long enough to let the operator see and lock the target, then goes to self guidance for the rest of the trip.

[–] EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works 7 points 6 months ago

This is such an obvious idea that it just shouldn't work yet it does

[–] Arbiter@lemmy.world 43 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Too many moving parts, replace the drone with a balloon.

[–] nuke@sh.itjust.works 46 points 6 months ago

I've been preparing for this moment my entire life

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 26 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Why would they have a tether on the drone? Seems to me you'd get more range if it was unleashed.

[–] nuke@sh.itjust.works 26 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

Leash laws

/cred to bypass signal jamming I guess. Wire-guided missiles work like this with miles of fiber optic line. I just can't imagine the logistics of such a cable working on a drone. Truly noncredible

[–] borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 6 months ago (2 children)

To be absolutely clear TOWs use copper wire.

[–] obre@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

If they wanted to be absolutely clear, they should definitely use optical fiber over copper

[–] borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 months ago

well played.

[–] verity_kindle@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

That is economic assistance to rebuild after the battle. Cash for copper, it's got to be safer than robbing substations.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

If you went with copper, sure you'll be even more limited in range, but you could send power too, so it would be trade off.

[–] EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago

Please be considerate and pick up your drones leavings. Let's keep this battlefield clean

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 months ago

UNLEASH THE DRONE

[–] SmoothIsFast@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Tethers can't be jammed. Electronic warfare is a serious concern.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (3 children)

They most certainly can be.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MxM111@kbin.social 20 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Actually, everyone assumes that it is signal going through the fiber, but there are power over fiber systems available, and can deliver several Watts of power. Your drone would not need battery and can stay forever in the air. The same fiber can be used for signal transmission too, so it becomes more resilient to electronics warfare.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Power over fiber exists, but you need a seriously big unit to deliver anything over 15 watts. 15 watts does not lift a drone, and it really doesn't make it go as fast as a tank.

[–] aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

15 watts could certainly lift a drone, a 15 watt drone probably couldn’t lift a 15 watt fiber power receiver though. Really the fiber is just silly. Use a laser or regular wires

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

DJI Mavic 3 (a modest camera drone) has a 74Wh battery with a claimed flight time of 46 minutes. That means it needs 48W.

High speed racing drones, like the kind you might want to make into a kamakazie drone, will take a lot more than that.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 18 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Ukraine actually did find a few Russian drones connected by an incredibly long thin tether. Since jamming drones' control channels is a massive issue on both sides and it would be nice just not to have to worry about it, it does make some level of sense. As far as I'm aware from public sources, the ultimate conclusion after not very many experiments was that it's way too much of a pain in the ass to be worthwhile.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 months ago

Just to be disgustingly credible for a moment, I imagine that the biggest practical issue with tethering a drone to, say, a tank, is that as soon as someone spots the drone (which is floating in the air with zero ability to camouflage itself) they have now spotted that you have a tank somewhere very close by. Close enough that just dropping an artillery barrage on the whole area probably isn't a waste. With good enough optics you could probably even follow the cable in order to get an exact location on the operator, and then introduce them to Mr Missile.

[–] nuke@sh.itjust.works 13 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Pfft! Easy.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Biggest issue I see is the weight of the wire. The farther up, or farther away the drone gets, the more weight of cable it needs to carry, and the more likely it is that this cable gets snared on something.

[–] DaPorkchop_@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 months ago

This could be easily resolved by attaching more drones to the fiber at regular intervals to keep it supported.

[–] Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago

What is this, a war thunder forum? Stop releasing the secrets!

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Something I've wondered about myself is having a laser communication system on the drone and controller on mounts that always turn to point at eachother, so that jamming the signal isn't doable because it's highly directional. Probably want a repeater drone that flies at high altitude above trees and terrain to give it line of sight on all the other drones

[–] VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 months ago

Yeah I saw some drone swarm ideas like that, hard to know what got picked up but having some drones as repeaters giving hard to disrupt signals locally and communicating with base units via highly directional laser or microwave repeater drones is almost certainly something they have or are working on.

[–] earthwalker31@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 6 months ago

This comment section is getting way too credible

[–] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Optical fibre is fucking fragile as all hell. You aren't going to see appreciable signal loss with an antenna with much better weight savings not have a spool of cable either on the armoured vehicle (minimal if on the vehicle) or the drone (undesirable). Not to mention the mechanical issues associated with the spooling.

[–] SmoothIsFast@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago (5 children)

Optical fiber is actually quite strong and flexible these days. Especially when bundled with a small kevlar strength member or when armored.

https://youtu.be/UBt00CVvMBA

[–] borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The strands are still glass though, and have a much wider maximum bend radius than something like CAT* cable.

[–] SmoothIsFast@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Did you watch the video? He's wrapping fiber optic cable over a 10mm mandrel with no problems and it's causing no loss. The video is 10 years old at this point too, we've probably progressed further with technology.

[–] borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 6 months ago

Huh. I guess the company i worked for was cheap as shit and bought trash cable.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 6 points 6 months ago

Optical fiber is really not very flexible. It doesn't like sharp corners, it has pretty fast dropout, and if it gets banged against something it'll break.

It's good for infrastructure that doesn't move, it's not fantastic for controlling vehicles remotely. That's why remote control submarines don't use it and underwater is probably a more forgiving environment than in the air.

[–] psmgx@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

S A C L O S

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 months ago

Biggest problem I see is that you are firing the case with the bullet. They don't work very well that way, though taking a page out of aperture science's playbook, it does give you 60% more bullet per bullet.

[–] RobertoOberto@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago

Command & Conquer Generals did it first.

load more comments
view more: next ›