• NegativeInf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Those are a lot of good points. Even if we’re the more portable types of EMP, the downsides are apparent. And I didn’t even think about lasers.

    Does a weapon like CHIMERA stand a better chance at these kinds of drone tactics? I’m just generally curious as to how warfare evolved beyond drones?

    • FermiEstimate@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      The microwave thing? I couldn’t even guess, though I personally wouldn’t want to stand next to it even if it works. A big microwave emitter on the battlefield is just asking to catch a HARM.

      It really doesn’t seem like anyone knows for sure what to do about drones right now.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Microwaves, especially at higher frequencies like I think those use, also don’t travel terribly well through inclement weather or dust. If I was ever up against one of those things I’d bring a super-soaker full of brine and just try to get it really wet.

        They’re also pricey and high tech, and right now Russia can’t even build a non-stupid tank. For a Western military some variant of this might work, maybe using a more moderate frequency from a phased arra, or just lasers. At short range there’s always bullets. Interceptor drones are also bound to be a thing at some point.

        • notabot@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          H.A.R.M - High-speed Anti Radiation Missile.

          Basically, rather than having it’s own radar to track a target, or using IR sensors, it locks on to a target emitting lots of radio noise such as an enemy radar or jammer.