Thread 64375018

>>64375018 (OP)
Chinabros... Is this a new century of humiliation?

>>64375018 (OP)
Meh, only really works on certain types. It's a constant arms race of ways that work and counters that work, a bit like codes and cyphers in radio, you change them so they can't be caught. All these drones were probably using the same program and the same band.
They also will still work if they use fibre.

>>64375030
It's not jamming the drones, it microwaved them

>>64375047
Well no, they induced a current near the microwave band, you just Faraday cage the wires or use capacitors to counter it and they'll work again.

>>64375047
okay, so it does pretty much nothing for ground troops then

>>64375018 (OP)
Nah, don't think so. A skilled fpv pilot could probably fly around that thing once it gets registered on the field.

>>64375018 (OP)
Only one has to make it

>>64375052
>you just Faraday cage the wires or use capacitors to counter it and they'll work again.

Making the drones heavier and more expensive.

>>64375123

But if it requires 200 drones to do it, the economics of battle have shifted.

>>64375123
>It only costs ($500 x 2000) to hit a million dollar tank with a drone!
Lmao

>>64375030
There is no way a drone just falls down when its signal gets cut, surely the default mode is hover

>>64375240
it's a MIC product ad video so they have to fall spectacularly.

>>64375018 (OP)
Congratulations, they just gave reason to ground-hugging fiber-FPV drones.

>>64375060
Drone jammers don't jam humans either, shocker

>>64375123
The countermeasures cost a few bucks in electricity. You only need 1, but how many drones are going to be sacrificed to get that 1?

>>64375186
That's funny and clever until you remember tanks have on average 3 to 6 crewmembers who cost multiple hundreds of thousands, if not millions to train.

>>64375240
PR stunt intended for boomers spending others' money, you'll see drones exploding with pyrotechnic in mid air when they start doing the same for lasers

>>64375018 (OP)
>NO CUM

>>64375018 (OP)
dronecels aren't gonna like this

>>64375414
And you've just thrown away your weekly budget on drones lying in fields.

>>64375240
>There is no way a drone just falls down when its signal gets cut
Yes, but it does if its internal components are jammed by microwaves. For example the motor controllers rely on sensing back EMF from the motors to correctly control the current, so even if you don't fry them altogether and induce lots of noise in the motor windings they'll just stop working.

Vaporware.
Conversely FPV drones are bagging >1000 meatbag kills a week in Ukraine rn.

>>64375523
>gets blocked by 0.1mm of aluminum insulation
Heh, nothing personnel

>>64375564
Good luck blocking several kW with that shit.

>>64375600
>oh no! 2ºC warmer!
Even mild steel is unaffected by that.

>>64375600
Several kilowatts that you'll have to provide continuously as more and more drones approach, so this is basically only useful tech on nuclear powered ships. Not to mention defeating heat weapons using ceramic coatings.

>>64375638
>Several kilowatts that you'll have to provide continuously as more and more drones approach, so this is basically only useful tech on nuclear powered ships.
Picrel is 6kW rated, wtf are you talking about?

>>64375638
>>64375634
Smooth-brains; they aren't heat weapons when deployed against electronics.
They are electromagnetic interference weapons. They don't heat up the drone, they impart electrical current into the circuitry itself.
You could shield it, hypothetically, but prey tell, how do you isolate a spinning rotor from it's winding? Or, how do you encapsulate a fan meant to generate lift in a faraday cage?

>>64375897
And that's why my microwave oven destroy my phone when I turn it on. OH WAIT!
It kills the camera at 00:32 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pep9_SO_ck0

>>64375922
Put your phone IN the microwave.
And, yes, poorly shielded microwaves are one of the classic sources of household interference that disrupts wifi and cellphone signals

>>64375934
>retard doesn't understand topology.
Ok, a phone wrapped with aluminum foil for the sake of being topologically correct
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0r0-mJWS9AQ
>FYI the arcing is normal if you leave loose ends unconnected to the rest, they work like a (external) antenna

>>64376014
a loop/external antenna*

>>64375634
Mhm, microwave some tinfoil and post results.

>>64375687
Yea, turns out fossile fuel is stupidly energy dense. That's why are using it.
For context, here's half a megawatt of power generation in a shipping container.

>>64375897
>how do you encapsulate a fan meant to generate lift in a faraday cage?
With a literal cage. Something like a chastity cage cum fenestron, I think you get the idea

>>64376112
>cope cages for drones
you just doubled the cost of the drones and their visual signature while reducing flight performance

>>64376014
Now wrap a drone in aluminum foil and see how well it flies.
>>64376112
Alright, now that you've wrapped your drone in a cuck cage, transmit a video signal.
Inb4
>OMG just make the drone completely autonomous!!!
We're talking about a weapon system; it is designed to take out drones that currently exist, not fictional wunderwaffe that have yet to be fielded by any country, ever.
Brass tacks; drones are vulnerable to EW, and will be for the foreseeable future. This weapon most certainly works, but like all other weapon systems, must be employed alongside other weapons in order to operate effectively.
Jammers work extremely well, and despite the existence of fiber optic drones, they are invaluable on the front line.
Something like this could defeat fiber optic drones, making it an extremely effective weapon.
The potential future existence of autonomous EW-proof drones does not, in fact, invalidate the effectiveness of thid weapon system.

Does this mean the Red Coast anti-satellite antenna from Three Body Problem could work?

>>64375414
Non-russian MBTs tend to take dozens and dozens of drone hits without a single crewman being injured or killed.

>>64375018 (OP)
always was, we're just too stupid to not have done it before
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XbLz0L6UdI

how many of these can be feasibly fielded? looks like they have high energy reqs
>these become the priority 1 targets for SEAD
and you're back to square 1

this just raises the complexity a bit and eliminates the cheapest garbage assembled from off the shelf chinese parts, shielding would defeat this if the design and testing was conducted by proper engineers
yes shielding does not work at point blank ranges because eventually the field strength is enough to break the continuity of the shield but it reduces the defended footprint dramatically and opens up the possibility for SEAD tactics

>>64377867
>shielding would defeat this if the design and testing was conducted by proper engineers
an impassable barrier to the hordes of shrieking drone obsessed browns that are clamoring for the downfall of the wect