Interesting Question: What if Iran Develops a Drone Army Like Turkey?

[Wombat + 1,028]

4 minutes ago, El Nikko said:

Like which one? Most employed are not particularly fast nor agile and a human piloted aircraft cannot be hacked.

It's one thing to be flying drones over poorly defended countries, a totally different situation if it was versus a modern military power and things got really serious satellites would be destroyed and the drones unable to be remotely operated.

Don't be silly, you can't put a pilot in an aircraft with a scram-jet. I bet you didn't know about the B2 stealth bomber till it first got used in Gulf War 1?

[El Nikko + 2,145]

5 minutes ago, Wombat said:

Don't be silly, you can't put a pilot in an aircraft with a scram-jet. I bet you didn't know about the B2 stealth bomber till it first got used in Gulf War 1?

Don't be silly I'm not talking about mythical aircraft we don't know exist unless you would like to share something with us.

Hacking and jamming signals and taking out satellites....you believe that those three things are not an issue for remotely piloted aircraft because that is not what I've been told.

Stealth aircraft also have plenty of vulnerabilities as well, nothing is what they advertise to the public

[Wombat + 1,028]

21 minutes ago, El Nikko said:

Don't be silly I'm not talking about mythical aircraft we don't know exist unless you would like to share something with us.

Hacking and jamming signals and taking out satellites....you believe that those three things are not an issue for remotely piloted aircraft because that is not what I've been told.

Stealth aircraft also have plenty of vulnerabilities as well, nothing is what they advertise to the public

There is nothing mythical about artificially intelligent drones that can navigate without GPS. They can use the stars (and inertial navigation) and also "see" targets with their infra-red eyes.

[El Nikko + 2,145]

On 3/3/2020 at 2:11 AM, Zhong Lu said:

What exactly are you supposed to do to counter that? Shooting a missile at a drone isn't worth the cost and they fly too fast to be reliably shot down by ballistics.  

Anyway back to the original question,

"What if Iran Develops a Drone Army Like Turkey?"

Turkey has access to the satellite network which is likely very secure probably/maybe the same used by NATO and that's the main advantage when comparing it with anything Iran has. Iran does have a reasonably advanced drone fleet which has been used in Syria, Iraq and Yemen and no doubt access to some Chinese and maybe Russian technology. From what I understand they still use radio signals to control them or GPS guidance so nothing close to the US Predator type drones.

Or maybe the question should be what if they have small short range suicide drones with explosives which can be used to overwhelm defenses...the answer to that is they do have them like but these can be jammed easier, carry very small payloads which do limited damage. Syrian rebels have been using them for some time so a nation like Iran will have been investing in this tech.

Until Iran gets access and the tech to control them via satellite they won't be anywhere close to what the Turks have, their ballistic missiles on the other hand do appear to be quite accurate from the footage I've seen but still they are way behind Turkey.

Anyway I've shown you how they already are countered, the smaller the drone the harder it is to target but there is always a downside and that is lower payload and shorter range including the range they can be away from the radio signal, I think very small suicide drones are probably more of a nuisance but still have to be dealt with.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,132]

16 minutes ago, El Nikko said:

Don't be silly I'm not talking about mythical aircraft we don't know exist unless you would like to share something with us.

Hacking and jamming signals and taking out satellites....you believe that those three things are not an issue for remotely piloted aircraft because that is not what I've been told.

Stealth aircraft also have plenty of vulnerabilities as well, nothing is what they advertise to the public

Most so called civi "drones" have no INS(internal navigation system) in them.  They are purely GPS/GLONASS/GALILEO guided and can be easily jammed by blocking those frequencies.  Military drones do so they do not need GPS.  Now weather said drone has proper ability to determine when GPS is being jammed and drop back to its INS is another matter entirely.  The early drones were never intended for war, but rather as trials for integration/usefulness, and their hardened ability to withstand hacking is pitiful.  It was an afterthought at best, especially on the small drones which frankly you do not care about as it is nothing but off the shelf civi components.  Bigger drone manufacturers for the western militaries... I'll bet it is different especially now.  20 years ago?  No.   

OF course the drones, other than strike vehicles at fixed targets, are easily jammed to their respective satellites.  The frequencies are known.  Why there has been an immense amount of $$$ dumped into white noise carrier wave data transfer since the 70's.  The severe limitations of the EMS(electromagnetic spectrum) have been known for a very long time and its ability to CHEAPLY and EASILY be blocked.  Why LASER communication using LOS has also received immense amounts of funding from US military since ~80's. 

Only reason drones became viable is that the US military finally got enough satellites in space to transfer enough data for video.  This finally trickled over to the civilian side.  Just to show how SMALL the EMS is... and how vulnerable to being jammed, at the height of small IRAQ/Afghan wars, with only a few drones flying in mostly recon roles, US Military was buying bandwidth from civilian satellites. 

DRONES as a viable weapon currently are easily countered in the recon role.  Attack role against fixed targets?  Nope. 

[El Nikko + 2,145]

2 minutes ago, Wombat said:

There is nothing mythical about artificially intelligent drones that can navigate without GPS. They can use the stars (and inertial navigation) and also "see" targets with their infra-red eyes.

Are you the guy who posted drone info after the Saudi Aramco attack? If so I was going to refernce something you had written.

I know that technology already exists my point was that if you want to fly drones over a country that has a good quality air defense system then you're probably going to lose a lot of them like the Turks are right now. Modern surface to air missile technology is the reason so much money has been piled in to stealth technology which is imperfect but neccesary on a modern battlefield.

[El Nikko + 2,145]

3 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Most so called civi "drones" have no INS(internal navigation system) in them.  They are purely GPS/GLONASS/GALILEO guided and can be easily jammed by blocking those frequencies.  Military drones do so they do not need GPS.  Now weather said drone has proper ability to determine when GPS is being jammed and drop back to its INS is another matter entirely.  The early drones were never intended for war, but rather as trials for integration/usefulness, and their hardened ability to withstand hacking is pitiful.  It was an afterthought at best, especially on the small drones which frankly you do not care about as it is nothing but off the shelf civi components.  Bigger drone manufacturers for the western militaries... I'll bet it is different especially now.  20 years ago?  No.   

OF course the drones, other than strike vehicles at fixed targets, are easily jammed to their respective satellites.  The frequencies are known.  Why there has been an immense amount of $$$ dumped into white noise carrier wave data transfer since the 70's.  The severe limitations of the EMS(electromagnetic spectrum) have been known for a very long time and its ability to CHEAPLY and EASILY be blocked.  Why LASER communication using LOS has also received immense amounts of funding from US military since ~80's. 

Only reason drones became viable is that the US military finally got enough satellites in space to transfer enough data for video.  This finally trickled over to the civilian side.  Just to show how SMALL the EMS is... and how vulnerable to being jammed, at the height of small IRAQ/Afghan wars, with only a few drones flying in mostly recon roles, US Military was buying bandwidth from civilian satellites. 

DRONES as a viable weapon currently are easily countered in the recon role.  Attack role against fixed targets?  Nope. 

Totally agree

[Wombat + 1,028]

2 minutes ago, El Nikko said:

Are you the guy who posted drone info after the Saudi Aramco attack? If so I was going to refernce something you had written.

I know that technology already exists my point was that if you want to fly drones over a country that has a good quality air defense system then you're probably going to lose a lot of them like the Turks are right now. Modern surface to air missile technology is the reason so much money has been piled in to stealth technology which is imperfect but neccesary on a modern battlefield.

No, I am not that guy, just a silly Physicist who doesn't know what I talkin about?

[Wombat + 1,028]

10 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Most so called civi "drones" have no INS(internal navigation system) in them.  They are purely GPS/GLONASS/GALILEO guided and can be easily jammed by blocking those frequencies.  Military drones do so they do not need GPS.  Now weather said drone has proper ability to determine when GPS is being jammed and drop back to its INS is another matter entirely.  The early drones were never intended for war, but rather as trials for integration/usefulness, and their hardened ability to withstand hacking is pitiful.  It was an afterthought at best, especially on the small drones which frankly you do not care about as it is nothing but off the shelf civi components.  Bigger drone manufacturers for the western militaries... I'll bet it is different especially now.  20 years ago?  No.   

OF course the drones, other than strike vehicles at fixed targets, are easily jammed to their respective satellites.  The frequencies are known.  Why there has been an immense amount of $$$ dumped into white noise carrier wave data transfer since the 70's.  The severe limitations of the EMS(electromagnetic spectrum) have been known for a very long time and its ability to CHEAPLY and EASILY be blocked.  Why LASER communication using LOS has also received immense amounts of funding from US military since ~80's. 

Only reason drones became viable is that the US military finally got enough satellites in space to transfer enough data for video.  This finally trickled over to the civilian side.  Just to show how SMALL the EMS is... and how vulnerable to being jammed, at the height of small IRAQ/Afghan wars, with only a few drones flying in mostly recon roles, US Military was buying bandwidth from civilian satellites. 

DRONES as a viable weapon currently are easily countered in the recon role.  Attack role against fixed targets?  Nope. 

Let me assure you, the whole point of AI is to enable drones to attack fixed AND moving targets. 

[El Nikko + 2,145]

3 minutes ago, Wombat said:

No, I am not that guy, just a silly Physicist who doesn't know what I talkin about?

I didn't accuse you of not knowing what you are talking about I was talking about the current limitations of drone warfare particularly the drones that are being deployed around the world.

I don't post to take sides however I've spend the last 10 years researching and studying the conflicts in the Middle East and also Ukraine and have gathered a mass of information which is interesting and always nice to share and get other people's thoughts on.

 

[Wombat + 1,028]

1 minute ago, El Nikko said:

I didn't accuse you of not knowing what you are talking about I was talking about the current limitations of drone warfare particularly the drones that are being deployed around the world.

I don't post to take sides however I've spend the last 10 years researching and studying the conflicts in the Middle East and also Ukraine and have gathered a mass of information which is interesting and always nice to share and get other people's thoughts on.

 

No problem, I suggest you google "big dog robot" to get some idea where modern warfare is headed.

[Bob D + 562]

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

You think they care about money?  Look at the debt and "defence" budget.

Even a few rounds of a big regular gun can cost as much as a plastic drone.  They can probably 3D print this stuff.

Don't even arm them, just use them as flak, chaff, distractions...   waste their time, munitions, attention.  "Cry wolf" enough times and vigilance falls.

That's exactly why Tehran will one day be a glass parking lot!

[El Nikko + 2,145]

2 minutes ago, Wombat said:

Let me assure you, the whole point of AI is to enable drones to attack fixed AND moving targets. 

But when you think about it it's not so dissimilar to radar guided missiles, even in very recent times these systems are not used to their full capability because there is too much posibility of blue on blue incidents. Theoretically it works but in practice things can still go wrong. I'm not convinced drones have been in fully autonomous mode except in places where there are no friendly forces, I would be happy and intregued to be corrected.

[El Nikko + 2,145]

1 minute ago, Wombat said:

No problem, I suggest you google "big dog robot" to get some idea where modern warfare is headed.

We can both agree it's definitely heading that way!

[Wombat + 1,028]

2 minutes ago, El Nikko said:

We can both agree it's definitely heading that way!

Yes, I hope u know that US already has robot cheetahs that can outrun and jump an Olympic hurdler! God knows what else? The possibilities are endless.

[El Nikko + 2,145]

23 minutes ago, Wombat said:

Yes, I hope u know that US already has robot cheetahs that can outrun and jump an Olympic hurdler! God knows what else? The possibilities are endless.

For sure, a lot of weapons that people think are quite new were developed decades ago. Anti shipping guided air to surface missiles were first used by the Germans in WW2 for example. Drones were being used in Vietnam I believe. I find it all very interesting, it's like a cold war of technology but I would agree the US is most likely years if not decades ahead of any competition but the military industrial complex (to coin a phrase) play Russian and Chinese tech up so they can get more funding.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

8 hours ago, Zhong Lu said:

Each surface to air missile is more expensive then the drone that's shot down.  

True, but is it more expensive than what the drone MAY have destroyed?

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,132]

4 hours ago, El Nikko said:

For sure, a lot of weapons that people think are quite new were developed decades ago. Anti shipping guided air to surface missiles were first used by the Germans in WW2 for example. Drones were being used in Vietnam I believe.

Drone bombs/missiles (Obsolete aircraft radio controlled) were used by all sides in WWII other than by Japan/Russia.  True, the control was via human, but they worked by almost always hitting. 

[Zhong Lu + 845]

55 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

True, but is it more expensive than what the drone MAY have destroyed?

But what if someone also floods the area with cheap fake drones that look the same as the real bomb carrying drone? You've only got so many missiles.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Zhong Lu

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

14 minutes ago, Zhong Lu said:

But what if someone also floods the area with cheap fake drones that look the same as the real bomb carrying drone? You've only got so many missiles.

In which case, as has been mentioned previously, you destroy the source of the drones and the areas where they are launched.

Cheap fake drones become ‘not so cheap’ when you are ‘flooding’ them. An economy of scale again.

[RichieRich216 + 454]

Nuke them and be done with there drama...

[George8944 + 128]

9 hours ago, Wombat said:

Actually George, have you ever heard of "Metal Storm"?

I just learned of it when I couldn't remember the exact name of the M134 and was googling to find it.   The metal storm came up.   I like the name.

[Wombat + 1,028]

14 hours ago, El Nikko said:

Don't be silly I'm not talking about mythical aircraft we don't know exist unless you would like to share something with us.

Hacking and jamming signals and taking out satellites....you believe that those three things are not an issue for remotely piloted aircraft because that is not what I've been told.

Stealth aircraft also have plenty of vulnerabilities as well, nothing is what they advertise to the public

Would u be so kind to elucidate some of the vulnerabilities of stealth aircraft? I cannot think of any!

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

21 minutes ago, Wombat said:

Would u be so kind to elucidate some of the vulnerabilities of stealth aircraft? I cannot think of any!

First, ANY aircraft using electronic or digital systems must be vulnerable to EMP weapons in the first case and hacking in the second...in my humble opinion as I am not a weapons specialist.

Second, stealthy aircraft are stealthy, until they aren’t. If these aircraft have internal weapons stores, they are stealthy right up until they open the bay doors - then they aren’t. Granted, this is only for a short time, but still a vulnerability. Radars will continue to improve to detect stealth aircraft....and stealth technology will continue to improve to defeat the new radars, and on and on we go. The F-117 used to be THE stealth aircraft, it is now obsolete.

Finally guys, I would bet good money that there are a few ‘mythical’ aircraft out there in production that we don’t know about! The SR71 was a secret for years! It first flew in 1964 and still holds several records. If the military had a real ‘game changing’ aircraft, or any weapons system, why would they let anyone know about it - I sure as heck wouldn’t!

 

[Wombat + 1,028]

7 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

First, ANY aircraft using electronic or digital systems must be vulnerable to EMP weapons in the first case and hacking in the second...in my humble opinion as I am not a weapons specialist.

Second, stealthy aircraft are stealthy, until they aren’t. If these aircraft have internal weapons stores, they are stealthy right up until they open the bay doors - then they aren’t. Granted, this is only for a short time, but still a vulnerability. Radars will continue to improve to detect stealth aircraft....and stealth technology will continue to improve to defeat the new radars, and on and on we go. The F-117 used to be THE stealth aircraft, it is now obsolete.

Finally guys, I would bet good money that there are a few ‘mythical’ aircraft out there in production that we don’t know about! The SR71 was a secret for years! It first flew in 1964 and still holds several records. If the military had a real ‘game changing’ aircraft, or any weapons system, why would they let anyone know about it - I sure as heck wouldn’t!

 

Ah Doug, u forget that I am a Physicist and I know all about these "mythical" aircraft. I sure as heck won't let you know about them but I have given you plenty of hints and you can't join the dots. So far, nobody on this site has demonstrated any knowledge of physics and I just fishing. Not gonna give any secrets to the Chinese!