• AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I wonder if a drone “carrier” would be a reasonable idea. It would certainly make a good movie.

    Think of a big expensive reusable drone like a Reaper, able to fly in from hundreds of miles away, then loiter all day just out of range. When it sees a target, instead of launching an expensive missile, launch drones to targets. This lets you carry more and cheaper weapons, while also taking advantage of high quality reconnaissance and all day loitering

    • TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Actually, the US already has those. They are sailing logistic hubs which are converted merchant ships. It can support multiple helicopters landed at the same time and it can transport fuel and other goods. But more importantly, it can carry and control several shipping containers full of drones from a safe distance behind their warships in action. They are completely different to previous military logistic ships, they are considered asymmetric hybrid logistic combat platforms, or special ops mpyherships. And because they used to be merchant ships, they are extremily cheap compared to actual military ships.

      The only official one known is the MV Ocean Trader. They are support ships so not official military commissioned ships.

      The US, Russia and China (and maybe other countries) are experimenting with civilian ships carrying military gear in shipping containers. Like radar systems and missile systems, but also drone launchers and jammers. Russia is already known for their asymmetric warfare, with their seperstist armies fighting in Ukraine before they invaded, their shadow fleets and their mercenary armies in Africa. But China and the US are also operating in a similar way, finding a gray area between civil and military operations.

      Why, you may ask? Well, during a conflict a military target is a valid target. But a civilian target is not. So why not equip a civilian target with military gear? That’s also why the invasion in Ukraine was labeled by Russia as a “special military operation” instead of a war. Same as what the US did when they kidnapped Maduro and when they illegally attacked Iran. “Let’s call it differently so we can get away with it.”

    • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Honestly the place my brain went is weirdly the old blimp carrier concept from the inter-war period. Like I wonder if it could be adapted to work with drones, maybe with modern materials and tech it could solve the core issues of it being weirdly uncontrollable and the planes breaking themselves and the blimp when trying to “land”.

      • TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        They are already working on it. Old Zeppelin hangars have been facelift and new ones have been built and in secret they are re-developping them to be drone and control platforms. I don’t know why, they stopped using and developing them because they are highly unpredictable and dangerous in heavy winds.

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Blimps and Zeplins were heavily limited by the tech of their time materials were heavy and hard to use for example I know damned well the blimps built here in SoCal used leather gaskets. It’s possible to compensate for some of the instability with more modern props and battery tech.

          Also if shit keeps going how it is we may need a couple modernized designs due to resource shortages, hydrogen can be sourced locally jet fuel not so much.

          • TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Even modern day designs have one major flaw: they can’t operate in wind. But rest assured, next to that major flaw there are many other flaw as well.

              • TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                16 minutes ago

                I couldn’t care less, as long as they don’t use hydrogen but helium when they fly over my house.

                But from what I’ve heard from avionic engineers and specialists it’s just stupid. But tell that to startups who got a motherload of money from the government consisting of idiots who pull the government’s wallet after seeing a 10min presentation which is basically a poorly produced animation video.