Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

The importance of line move

53 posts, 1234 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 3 (53 records)
sort

EErankNorthChileanG
10 months ago




+2 / -0




AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)


Coincidence...?
+9 / -0


AUrankAquanim
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)



[Spoiler]
+2 / -0


NOrankAdminAnarchid
10 months ago
Spring has this oh-exploitable logo style, so it would have been aesthetically superior.
+0 / -0

NZrankhedgehogs
10 months ago
oh ho
+1 / -0

EErankNorthChileanG
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)

Now that we have established that it is not coincidence... What would be the efficient methods to to fight this kind of swarms or ultra-swarms?

  • Even tracking all elements of swarm is hard or worse (think passive state swarm with almost no signature)
  • Single point or sparse defense can be cheaply overloaded even if it has rapid fire capability and extreme accuracy
(99% accuracy is not enough)
  • Distributed dense defense network has to have same magnitude of elements in swarm (with same or below unit cost of swarm)

End of the current widely spread warfare doctrines?


+0 / -0

NZrankhedgehogs
10 months ago
Run riots towards the swarm, spread defenses are useless against swarm unless DDM/stardust

Riots moving are much better for tactical overwhelming than porc since you can get more of them to the same target
+2 / -0


NOrankAdminAnarchid
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)

The drones neccessarily have shorter range weapons, if any, and practically no armor. You also cannot use AoE because the sky is big. An obvious approach is to just kill them with accurate, high rate of fire, longer range weapons (which in ZK would make them precise riots like mace, redback, felon).

Do we see people try to do that IRL? Yes we do - there are multiple rnd programs that specifically aim to produce a drone-chopping laser. The question is whether it will be cheap enough, but then these drones also require a proper plane to drop them, and besides the fuel and pilot time will consume the opportunity cost of this plane doing a conventional run, so it is reasonable to think it might.
+2 / -0


USrankaeonios
10 months ago
You can't chop things with lasers. Laser weapons are impractical for most purposes in general due to the slow damage and ridiculous energy requirements. You'd be better off with regular bombs/missiles/rockets/grenades/heavy machine guns/etc, but as anti-personnel weapons I would expect drones like that to be fairly terrifying.
+1 / -0


NOrankAdminAnarchid
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)

These and these guys seem to disagree on the "can't chop with laser" part.
+1 / -0


USrankaeonios
10 months ago
quote:
In Boeing’s test, it took 15 seconds to destroy the target.


Which I guess works if all you need to do is cut through the tail of a small flying drone. I doubt it would be particularly effective vs ground drones though, given that it requires line of sight and would probably take longer than 15 seconds to disable one drone. In that case the ground drones would pose a greater threat to the laser than the laser did to the drones.
+1 / -0


NOrankAdminAnarchid
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)

quote:
I doubt it would be particularly effective vs ground drones though

I don't see how UGV's would be any different from "weird infantry" or "robot tank" in this regard, so for them the point about "just shoot them in face with your existing gun" holds well. I think they're much less weird than swarmer UAV's anyway.

(or "send your own UGV to kill enemy UGV")
+0 / -0

NZrankhedgehogs
10 months ago
Gauss shots are not affected by light dispersion, unlike lasers, so it can fire against these whilst in fog/rain, which I expect these killer UAV's/UGV should be doing

They're better off attacking against infantry since they are much smaller, and probably won't have more than 1 missile to take out a heavy target.


Do you think CIWS on ships would be effective? Fill the air with a lot of bullets?
+1 / -0


USrankaeonios
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)

quote:
I don't see how UGV's would be any different from "weird infantry" or "robot tank" in this regard, so for them the point about "just shoot them in face with your existing gun" holds well. I think they're much less weird than swarmer UAV's anyway.


My mistake, these drones are actually flying. They're also purely for surveillance and are basically a battery and camera with wings. Considering that they can be dropped in the thousands though, a laser would need probably at least 10 seconds per drone and would have no chance of shooting them all down before they completed their mission.

The lasers are also shown being used against mortar fire, but the number of incoming shells they can deal with is not likely to be very high.

Also the way the lasers disabled the regular UAVs was not to 'shoot them in the face' but to cut through a very specific part of the drone causing it to lose control and crash. The main reason that works well is simply that the structure connecting the tail to the UAV is fairly thin and thus easy to destroy with a laser. Lasers are also more effective vs aircraft because the motion of the aircraft naturally blows away the metal vapor which would otherwise provide shielding against the laser and prevent it from ablating more material effectively.

EDIT: Also line move in this case is only being used to have the drones sweep an area and not particularly as a tactical maneuver.
+0 / -0

LVrankSenaven
10 months ago
Dat pain in head listening video at start only in one headphone.
+0 / -0

EErankNorthChileanG
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)

Few points on lasers and swarms:

  • Existing laser units are in high kW or even low MW range - many (tens of) magnitudes higher cost than drone unit.
  • Cost and energy requirements make lasers single or sparse point defense (think Annihilator vs Fleas in Z-k).
  • Even extremely high power lasers have kill time in 5..10 seconds despite having low cost per shot.
  • It is easy to disable single point defense with for example 5% of swarm units (think roaches - they are not super threat to all things in Z-k because they cost more than 1/10000 Annihilator price, plus static defense is near instant and 99.999 accurate against them).
  • Swarm delivery - it can happen in various cost effective ways, fighter jet with dropper is just one example.
  • Unit cost in swarm is already below thousand USD, now think of cutting edge technology of pressing wood pulp to thin sheets and forming planing structures from them...

http://www.recode.net/2017/1/12/14245816/disposable-drones-paper-darpa-save-your-life-otherlab

Most of you are higher ELO here than me here, I fully expect someone to have interesting new view angle on the problem :).

+0 / -0


USrankaeonios
10 months ago
Against a regular UAV it's probably more like an annihilator vs a banshee. Vs these microdrones it's definitely like using an annihilator against fleas.

They're basically so cheap and numerous that shooting them down isn't remotely worth it practically no matter what weapon you used. They also don't do any direct harm and are unlikely to be able to carry enough payload to do any harm unless biological weapons were used. As far as cheap disposable scouts go I don't think you could do much better.

Basically the only way to disable them cost effectively would be to set off an EMP bomb in the area where they were deployed, which you couldn't do without frying your own electronics in the process.
+0 / -0


NOrankAdminAnarchid
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)

quote:
many (tens of) magnitudes higher cost than drone unit

A ten orders of magnitude is 10 000 000 000, ten billion. Multiply by drone unit cost (Estimated at 1k) and you get a hundred billion per a single laser. I doubt this estimate. The capitalist-imperialist navy's own laser project costed about 30 mil $ iirc. That's the whole R&D plus prototypes, not production of a single device.

Unfortunately it doesn't look like Boeing or Rheinmetall are selling their things yet, so no hard data for now.
+0 / -0



CHrankAdminDeinFreund
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)

Assuming you can afford it by having a good wired network, you could use a broadband jammer to make the drones meaningless. (They are useless without the ability to communicate, but will probably have quite a few frequencies available to them)

Btw, you can even make one at home for very cheap. Get a microwave. This will jam pretty much all usable video transmission frequencies. Commands and low quality video may still be transmitted on lower frequencies, so you'll need something more elaborate for that.
+0 / -0

PLrankOrfelius
10 months ago
(edited 10 months ago)

Anti-personal lasers are not a thing and wont be a thing for a while. Keep in mind that a laser does not increase its lethality against human beings with power. Even if it might make a hole right trough your body it most likely wont mortally wound a person because of instant cauterization of the wound unless it strikes a major artery within the body. Thus it would have to be used against complicated, easily damaged essential organs such as heart, head and a spine. That is all assuming that laser would stay on point long enough to deal enough damage to the tissue which would require a lot of energy. So there is already absolutely no portability of the AP laser weapon and that is a total no-go in the current doctrine of mobile warfare. That being said, it also would be totally stupid to install a laser on a drone because again you would need to have a lot of power. A light flying drone can barely fit an accumulator to enable it flight for sevral hours let alone to fire a laser capable of severly damaging human flesh.

The "freedom fleet" is using much more powerful lasers but these are meant to be ship mounted turrets designed to melt focal points of ships which is comparable to a surgeon operating on a patient with a laser. But that surgeon is 20 nautical miles from his patient which he intends to kill. Also the patient is a big armored ship with lots of weakness points such as amunition storages, fuel storages, bridge, communication center etc. Such ships have massive engines and accumulators capable of supplying energy to these weapons.
+0 / -0
Page of 3 (53 records)