Which is one of the scariest things I've seen in a while. The video glosses over the fact that EMPs would probably make for a viable (if collateral-damage-inducing) defense, but still pretty terrifying.
I'm sure someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I think countering EMPs wouldn't be that difficult of a task.
Commercial electronics designers have been designing around EMI for decades now. Is it that hard to imagine that actors would put in the effort to shield their devices? A Faraday cage around the electronics would go a long way towards eliminating the effects of an EMP.
Even if you couldn't stop the EMP from knocking systems out, you could design them to come back online very quickly, making the EMP a rather expensive temporary measure.
For home-made drones it might be effective, but those drones are cheap, and the attackers could always launch more. I just don't see EMPs as posing a real threat to any military.
Ever since I saw that video I've been wondering how effective it would be to use essentially an upgraded fire suppression system to take on the drones.
Essentially instead of spraying water out of the sprinklers, spray paint or other liquids that would block the vision of the drones. I think that would be a lot cheaper and harder to build defences for than an EMP.
(Just realised that you could also spray a opaque gas which would also block vision and might make less of a mess to clean up).
If you don't mind getting yourself on a list, go to youtube and search for '2g ETN' (also PETN, APAN, HMTD, MEKP, etc). These are all home gamers, imagine military grade stuff...geesh.
Non-nuclear EMP weapons are not viable defenses. They are short ranged, very expensive, single use, and require detonating powerful conventional explosives.
The only effective defenses today are the same as against regular missiles: guns, missiles, decoys, ECM, and blinding lasers. In a few years high-powered lasers might become viable.
"The video glosses over the fact that EMPs would probably make for a viable (if collateral-damage-inducing) defense, but still pretty terrifying."
Some other possible defenses are other drones and flack clouds. A flack cloud in the classroom in the video might have defeated the drones.
Both of these defenses might be staged strategically throughout various public places or even carried by individuals for their own protection.
If drone attacks become common, anti-drone defenses are likely to become widespread as well.
I'm personally more concerned about potential chemical, biological, and nuclear warfare, against which there's really not much that people can do, and which might eventually become as easy to perpetrate as conventional drone attacks (and might even be facilitated by them).
Time to build that EMP-surviving car I've been dreaming of – one that can run even with all its electronics (except sparks) burnt out, falling back on mechanical timing and such!
The US Army has had to react by rebuilding short-range air defense capabilities. They used to be able to depend on the US Air Force to protect ground forces from aerial attack but now those days are gone.
The EM gun looks like a great solution - portable, similar range to a firearm and you don't have to worry about hitting the target with a projectile. It's still a guy doing that who's not carrying a gun though.
The main problem is detection and tracking. Even if you can counter the drones, the distraction of keeping an eye out for them and communicating back to your anti-drone guy is something you just don't want to have to deal with in close combat. Bear in mind these things can pop up and execute an attack in just a minute or two, possibly in swarms. Ideally you want an automated solution so your door kickers can focus on the job at hand.
Related: "Kill Decision" by Daniel Suarez. Talked about this exact thing. What happens when drones become so cheap and able to be armed, that a swarm of drones could come out of nowhere, commit a crime, and no one would have a clue where they came form.
What I think, is why no body weaponized aircraft model before.
Since 80's/90's small aircraft models had enough capacity to carry grenades and small explosives.
Also, I'm impressed that a cheap drone can use optical navigation. The last time that someone talked about it, was about it's usage on Tomahawk cruise missiles, since 80's, as a tech miracle of electronics.
It is natural that if one side starts to develop a new technology and employs it successfully, that the other parties will follow as well. This changes the landscape, sure. But it's not threatening. That's the normal process of development.
Every army is better of if they can use machines to do their attacks for them. At least between both armies this should also decrease the overall casualties I hope. I'm not so naive to assume that this would decrease civilian casualties, though.
Unless US military comes up with relieable and cheap solution they will eventually starve themselves as the parts to make attack drones gets cheaper and cheaper. Like the stinger missiles in the article, they cost almost $200k while a drone costs $2k + whatever they are dropping. Obviously US has money to spend, but for how long?
There are plenty of examples of asymmetric warfare like what happened to US in Vietnam or what happened to Russians in Finland.
It's pretty disgusting when you actually thinks about it. I don't want bad newspaper headlines about soldier deaths, so I'll use a robot that kills a bunch of civilians as collateral.
I've always figured the Chinese, if they went to a total war footing, would be able to shift their supply/production chains to mass produce effective swarms of drones.
Drones are still a lot more expensive than a 60 or 80mm mortar tube, though. I haven't seen many drones that could put an equivalent payload on target, and unless batteries get wildly better, I don't see much advantage in range for small, home-brew drones.
I've heard from some of my fellow Marines they were starting to get back into camouflaged outposts and such after mostly forgetting those skills in the (early) GWOT days.
That attack was way too sophisticated beyond the capability of any home-made effort. The attackers tried to cover it behind "home-made" veil. At any rate it threatens any conventional army.
Globally, that might not be a bad thing. The 20th Century has many examples of genocide and mass murder committed by armed State- or State-backed actors against their own population.
Democratizing a means of preventing that might help prevent similar atrocities in the 21st Century.
A second amendment for the 3D printed drone age, if you will.
[+] [-] sushisource|8 years ago|reply
Which is one of the scariest things I've seen in a while. The video glosses over the fact that EMPs would probably make for a viable (if collateral-damage-inducing) defense, but still pretty terrifying.
[+] [-] colemannugent|8 years ago|reply
Commercial electronics designers have been designing around EMI for decades now. Is it that hard to imagine that actors would put in the effort to shield their devices? A Faraday cage around the electronics would go a long way towards eliminating the effects of an EMP.
Even if you couldn't stop the EMP from knocking systems out, you could design them to come back online very quickly, making the EMP a rather expensive temporary measure.
For home-made drones it might be effective, but those drones are cheap, and the attackers could always launch more. I just don't see EMPs as posing a real threat to any military.
Am I off in my estimation?
[+] [-] robkop|8 years ago|reply
Essentially instead of spraying water out of the sprinklers, spray paint or other liquids that would block the vision of the drones. I think that would be a lot cheaper and harder to build defences for than an EMP.
(Just realised that you could also spray a opaque gas which would also block vision and might make less of a mess to clean up).
[+] [-] jcims|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nradov|8 years ago|reply
The only effective defenses today are the same as against regular missiles: guns, missiles, decoys, ECM, and blinding lasers. In a few years high-powered lasers might become viable.
[+] [-] pmoriarty|8 years ago|reply
Some other possible defenses are other drones and flack clouds. A flack cloud in the classroom in the video might have defeated the drones.
Both of these defenses might be staged strategically throughout various public places or even carried by individuals for their own protection.
If drone attacks become common, anti-drone defenses are likely to become widespread as well.
I'm personally more concerned about potential chemical, biological, and nuclear warfare, against which there's really not much that people can do, and which might eventually become as easy to perpetrate as conventional drone attacks (and might even be facilitated by them).
[+] [-] EGreg|8 years ago|reply
https://youtu.be/CGAk5gRD-t0
[+] [-] Raphmedia|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Waterluvian|8 years ago|reply
It's very chilling that this new vector of attack is very much here for everyone to utilize.
[+] [-] lost_my_pwd|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Bromskloss|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mattkrause|8 years ago|reply
That said, a lot of it is surprisingly plausible (though maybe not the grainy filming-a-CRT overlays).
[+] [-] nradov|8 years ago|reply
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7155/isis-drone-droppin...
The US Army has had to react by rebuilding short-range air defense capabilities. They used to be able to depend on the US Air Force to protect ground forces from aerial attack but now those days are gone.
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/17747/us-army-rushes-to...
[+] [-] simonh|8 years ago|reply
The main problem is detection and tracking. Even if you can counter the drones, the distraction of keeping an eye out for them and communicating back to your anti-drone guy is something you just don't want to have to deal with in close combat. Bear in mind these things can pop up and execute an attack in just a minute or two, possibly in swarms. Ideally you want an automated solution so your door kickers can focus on the job at hand.
[+] [-] craftyguy|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mrfusion|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Overtonwindow|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Zardoz84|8 years ago|reply
Also, I'm impressed that a cheap drone can use optical navigation. The last time that someone talked about it, was about it's usage on Tomahawk cruise missiles, since 80's, as a tech miracle of electronics.
[+] [-] erikb|8 years ago|reply
It is natural that if one side starts to develop a new technology and employs it successfully, that the other parties will follow as well. This changes the landscape, sure. But it's not threatening. That's the normal process of development.
Every army is better of if they can use machines to do their attacks for them. At least between both armies this should also decrease the overall casualties I hope. I'm not so naive to assume that this would decrease civilian casualties, though.
[+] [-] nextlevelwizard|8 years ago|reply
Unless US military comes up with relieable and cheap solution they will eventually starve themselves as the parts to make attack drones gets cheaper and cheaper. Like the stinger missiles in the article, they cost almost $200k while a drone costs $2k + whatever they are dropping. Obviously US has money to spend, but for how long?
There are plenty of examples of asymmetric warfare like what happened to US in Vietnam or what happened to Russians in Finland.
[+] [-] mattmanser|8 years ago|reply
It's pretty disgusting when you actually thinks about it. I don't want bad newspaper headlines about soldier deaths, so I'll use a robot that kills a bunch of civilians as collateral.
[+] [-] happycube|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] megaman22|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RachelF|8 years ago|reply
I don't think it is real, but it shows the future.
[+] [-] arca_vorago|8 years ago|reply
There is nothing new under the sun.
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] hamitron|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ceejayoz|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rmetzler|8 years ago|reply
I guess terrorists will use them against US drones, and military and commercial aircrafts.
[+] [-] neonate|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sizzle|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] remind_me_again|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ataturk|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] aaron695|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ricardobeat|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] duncan_bayne|8 years ago|reply
Democratizing a means of preventing that might help prevent similar atrocities in the 21st Century.
A second amendment for the 3D printed drone age, if you will.
[+] [-] ataturk|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]