Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @fnordius @nyrath @cstross Why can't a drone guard the ladder afterward?
One tactic the Ukrainians have mastered is to simply park a drone somewhere and observe with its camera. If a Russian soldier walks by, they detonate the warhead.
Crude, but effective.
If someone gets too close to the ladder, boom.
Charlie Stross
@isaackuo @nyrath Way I see it, existing warship designs were caught wrong-footed by the sudden explosion of interest in drones, which they lack room and support for: this is a temporary fix—cheap and fast to build, small crew, use it to cover the capability gap while new primary warship designs evolve that can do drone warfare for themselves.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@nyrath It appears to lack any sort of serious air defense radar, so it would depend on at least one escort for that.
However, with sufficient sensor/fire control sharing, it would be possible to use an escort's air defense radar to track and paint targets for drones and/or missiles launched from drones to home in on.
This could be a particularly good synergy with most of Europe's warships - they've got the radar, but have limited VLS ammo.
Winchell Chung ⚛🚀
Looks like it relies on the hornets nest principle for self defense.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@swope Yeah. No pew pew laser, though.
This ship looks pretty meager in terms of sensors, and seems to have no armament of its own. I feel like that's a good tradeoff for fully committing available space for drone operation.
swope
@isaackuo
Suddenly I'm reminded of Carrier Command (Rainbird, 1988) on an Amiga, where you could launch Manta drone aircraft and Walrus drone hovercraft tanks.
Isaac Ji Kuo
Portugal's new drone carrier costs less than a tenth as much as an Arleigh Burke destroyer and can operate aerial, surface, and underwater drones.
https://www.euronews.com/2026/01/29/portugal-builds-europes-first-dedicated-drone-carrier-d-joao-ii
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath I think it's a certain challenge, but I see a straightforward path forward.
The quintessential "problem" is that drones typically cost a lot less than missiles. APKWS is cheaper than most drones, though.
So to me, the most straightforward "solution" is to arm warships with drones to take out drones. Reusability can help, but the basic idea is that interceptor drones can inherently be cheaper and lighter than offensive drones since they don't need as much range and
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath The ammo limits of VLS is a reason why the US Navy has developed an air launched version of SM-6. These are loaded and fired from F-18 jets, rather than VLS, providing an effective magazine depth only limited by funding.
However, each SM-6 is still really expensive. For use against cheaper targets, APKWS is used. These are launched from 70mm rocket pods so a single jet can carry dozens of them.
In Ukraine, I think the typical loadout is only one dozen (two pods).
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath 40 trucks with 10 drones each? That's only 400 drones, and they're really slow ones for 10 of them to fit in a single truck. (Like, something similar to a Shahed.)
A few F-18s with APKWS would intercept most of them, and a current destroyer can use more expensive VLS ESSM to take out the straglers.
Note that ESSM are quad-packed, so a Burke could theoretically carry up to 360 of them.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath Ukraine is defending a huge swathe of territory, though. Yemen is tiny compared to Ukraine.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath is constantly working on other anti-drone solutions, many of which are better on cost and scalability.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath You're stuck in the past. It was definitely a problem. The US military worked fast on a solution.
APKWS is actually not a new system, it just wasn't used for anti-air before.
It's more or less just luck that the US military had a quick fix option available. It's more or less luck that the war in Ukraine meant it could be quickly tried out and iterated upon.
But luck or not, the availability and use of APKWS for anti-drone use is the current reality.
And Ukraine
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath You're trying to draw a pattern from two vastly different situations, involving two vastly different adversaries and two vastly different defensive needs. It's not a pattern, it's two practically unrelated data points.
Ukraine has to defend a vast area against an opponent with vast resources. In contrast, ships at sea need to only defend a handful of point targets.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath It's easy to say that a power plant is a "highly specific resource" after the fact, but Ukraine has thousands of these "highly specific resources" spread across its vast area.
The bottom line is that Ukrainian defenses are successful. Russia continues to fail to produce crippling effects on Ukraine's energy infrastructure. A few limited temporary blackouts here and there is not anywhere close to producing a tangible benefit toward Russia's goals.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath Anyway, I don't know why you think radar would have more of a challenge detecting/tracking/designating drones over the sea than over the skies of Ukraine. It's no contest it's way easier over the sea. No terrain to block radar or produce clutter. This gives radar much better range and clarity.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath Oh please. You are blinded by recency bias. Just because something is in the news right now does not mean this is how it has been for a long time, and it does not mean it's going to continue for a long time.
In fact, the fact that it's currently in the news should be a red flag for you to consider that it is NEWS-worthy. And therefore NOT the typical pattern.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath The thing is, those drones are really slow. Like WWI biplane slow. So the engagement windows are a lot longer than you may be thinking.
But anyway, magazine depth is definitely a thing that a lot of navies are waking up to. The USN less so, since a Burke has a pretty deep VLS magazine. But there was a time when a lot of European warships had EIGHT VLS cells. Even quadpacked, that's only 32 anti-air missiles.
Charlie Stross
@isaackuo @Infoseepage @nyrath Depends on the jet! A few decades ago Israel was fielding jet-powered recce drones where the "jet" was a truck turbocharger with a combustion chamber welded between the compressor and turbine. MTBF was a few hours, but for a disposadrone that's plenty.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @cstross @nyrath Jet powered drones cost many times as much, which make them much less affordable compared to APKWS which just use cheap rocket motors.
As it is, a plain Shahed with no anti-ship guidance already costs about the same as an APKWS. A Shahed type drone with an anti-ship guidance system and jet engine will cost a lot more than an APKWS.
And like I said, APKWS itself is a lot more expensive than interceptor drones developed by Ukraine.
Charlie Stross
@isaackuo @Infoseepage @nyrath "Expensive toys" and then there's whatever the hell Gravity Industries are using (and pushing at mountain rescue organizations and the Royal Marine Commandos): https://gravity.co/
https://www.greatnorthairambulance.co.uk/jet-suit-paramedic/
Isaac Ji Kuo
@cstross @Infoseepage @nyrath I dunno ... I don't know about a jet hacked together from a turbocharger, but I do know there are tiny jet engines and they're not very good.
I think the main problem with them is that they are horribly fuel inefficient, so they don't have much endurance or range. So they're mostly limited to being expensive toys.
Charlie Stross
@fnordius @isaackuo @Infoseepage @nyrath It's also being tested by the Royal Marine Commandos for boarding actions at sea. (Turns out a jet pack with a 10-20 minute endurance is a game-changer compared to the old ones with 30 seconds.)
Marc Etienne
@cstross @isaackuo @Infoseepage @nyrath this is why I'm mildly irritated, because I would suspect the Alpine nations would have more of an issue with remote rescue operations.
In the end, I suspect the argument *really* is an attempt to find a problem where portable jet packs are the solution. And this, well, it ain't it. It smells like a scam.
Charlie Stross
@fnordius @isaackuo @Infoseepage @nyrath UK hospitals *do* have helipads. The use I'm talking about is a long way from any hospitals. It's mountain rescue in a remote area.
Marc Etienne
@isaackuo @cstross @Infoseepage @nyrath it may be me, spoiled by living in Germany, but most hospitals have a helipad and there's a nationwide network of helicopters assigned to regions. It's partially tax supported, but belongs to the ADAC motor club.
I guess the UK lacked that sort of engagement. Or it was blocked by infighting.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@cstross @Infoseepage @nyrath A helipad is not a big investment. It can be nothing more than a square of concrete. Even a small parking lot is much bigger.
It is expensive to have a helicopter and pilot on call, of course. But alternatives may be false economies due to the various costs of doing things differently from standard methods.
That said, they do make man-lifting multi-rotors, which would be orders of magnitude less expensive than a jet pack. You need a qualified drone pilot on call,
Charlie Stross
@isaackuo @Infoseepage @nyrath The problem is this area is remote-ish from local airports/helipads: the chopper has to fly in from out-of-area and is a lot more expensive than a jet pack.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@cstross @Infoseepage @nyrath Okay, but ... helicopter with a winch is still better? By the time you're suited up, the helicopter could have already dropped off one or more paramedics (who don't need to be trained on flying a jet suit).
Charlie Stross
@isaackuo @Infoseepage @nyrath No, it's for use in the Lake District, which is compact but crinkle-cut. There are roads, but hill walkers regularly get into trouble within half a mile of the road and it takes rescue climbers ages to get to them. The idea is to keep a jet pack in the back of an ambulance in order to get a first-responder the last half-mile over broken ground to a casualty as fast as possible to stabilize them for portage or airlift.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@cstross @Infoseepage @nyrath Well yeah, that is a VERY expensive toy.
I'm gonna be charitable to those air ambulance people that they know it's stupid but they just really want to fly around in jet packs. I mean ... I can't blame them. But also I'd rather not die that way.
(The sane alternative involves a helicopter equipped with a winch.)
Isaac Ji Kuo
@Infoseepage @fnordius @nyrath @cstross Seriously, this looks absolutely ridiculous. Remember that this jet pack is stupendously loud, and a much quieter drone could carry a ladder instead.
Or if it has to be a person, an electric paramotor is cheap and quiet, and it doesn't involve wearing heavy bulky arm thrusters. Heck, they're cheap enough that the entire team can assault the target from the air, approaching silently.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@cstross @Infoseepage @fnordius @nyrath Uhh ... yes? And?
Marines seizing a ship are armed with deadly weapons, including explosive grenades.
How is a human supposed to guard the ladder, except by the threat of deadly force? Same difference.
Charlie Stross
@isaackuo @Infoseepage @fnordius @nyrath You *are* aware that most of the time during naval boarding actions the objective is a *bloodless capture*, not mass murder and explosions? Just to get someone on the bridge who can stop the engines so the warship can come alongside.
Isaac Ji Kuo
@cstross @Infoseepage @fnordius @nyrath I wasn't describing a hovering drone, but a parked drone. It's parked on the deck next to the ladder.
If visibility is a problem, you can include flashing lights and/or audible warnings telling anyone nearby to stay away.
What is a human guarding the ladder going to do differently?
Charlie Stross
@isaackuo @Infoseepage @fnordius @nyrath Study primate ethology. Seriously. It's not the *use* of force that's the point, it's the *threat* of force. And an unseen drone hovering overhead is not a deterrent because none of the panicking crew being boarded can see it.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.