Pathetic
Flash explained at the time that the antenna configuration of the Peroyed system creates more of a “shield” than a “dome” of protection against Ukrainian UAVs. The estimated range of the station is around 15-50 metres, but the system does not provide 100% protection against drones.
Combined with only 40min of runtime out of it’s battery, and the fact UA is primarily using fiber-optic connected drones, not RF control…
Seems like more of a moral boost/hope, than an actual effective tool.
That things gotta give off an emf signature that screams ‘come shoot me’ like a damn bat signal too…
Combined with only 40min of runtime out of it’s battery, and the fact UA is primarily using fiber-optic connected drones, not RF control…
Sorry but i gotta ask for a source here
I believe its ai targeting for these types of drones
Fiber optic drones would have to be launched by sea drones due to lack of range (otherwise 2xing some of the higher estimates to have the chance to be a danger) and i dont think ive seen fiberoptic drones operating from sea drones
The section I quoted was in the context of land use. These wouldn’t be battery operated when fixed to a ship. I probably could have made that a little more clear.
Though, I think the drones UA has been using to strike tanker ships recently are fixed wing aircraft that would have an easier time guiding themselves in once a target is locked and remote singal lost. I could be wrong.
These are probably most effective against the small drone carrier boats. The ones that get close and launch a small swarm of quad copter attack drones.
Mounted on ships is probably the best place for these systems, but I’m still not convinced they’ll make a significant difference in defence.
what are they doing? duct-taping a bunch of tasers to the hulls of their ships? lol
The funny part is in my opinion the best way to conceptualize a navy is to consider it an instrument of force projection through the medium of an ocean. A navy isn’t really meant for projecting force locally, it is for collecting material and power from big expanses and concentrating it at some distant point in order to disturb the logistics and economy of an enemy while remaining elusive and difficult to strike back at.
The fact that these ships “need” these jammers means that russians don’t believe their ships project power any more than ~300 meters from their ship otherwise why would they need a system for jamming drone swarms at extreme tactical close ranges? Which isn’t to say short range mass swarm air defense isn’t a critical part of air defense, but you get my point.
A destroyer integrated into a modern combined arms military can project power for 10s of kms to 100s of kms… I don’t know what these russian ships are but they are clearly NOT doing that.
To put it another way, if you are investing heavily in “tactical” solutions for your ships like this, you have clearly already strategically lost.
That’s hitting the nail on the head
Eh sorry but i gotta be fair to the russian navy here
Chaffs a standard, noise makers, decoy torpedos (or what ever they are called) and jammers have all been here for decades and now counter torpedos are apperantly coming
Yeah they do lack enough protection from drones for power projection but its not indicated by jammers, they are an emergency addition due to a threat they didnt expect (how much they are at fualt for takeing ww1 to do such basic measures is a diffrent matter)
You have to zoom out, this isn’t a tactical discussion about whether high ammunition short range air defense and EW jamming is necessary, it is about what the current vulnerability in the russian navy proves about its impotence and inability to project power.
Seems like it’d be feasible (and fun!) to build an anti-EM drone/loitering munition for targeting radar and EW systems. I mean, that emitter is basically screaming “I’m right here, come explode on me!”
