I fought in Ukraine and here's why FPV drones kind of suck

Many of the issues sound like issues coming from using improvised civilian hobbyist tech and doctrine being in its infancy.

If current FPV drones are bit lackluster, it doesn't preclude 'next generation' that are purposefully developed for military use won't be useful. Also it sounds like the designation of "FPV drone" is specific to particular family of drones specific in current day and time, which may be something quite else next year. Like, obviously the next stage is a FPV drone with some capabilities of "reusable" drone or loitering munition author complains of (capability to hover easily)? Or "reusable" drone with FPV camera?

> Many of the issues sound like issues coming from using improvised civilian hobbyist tech

I don't think it's improvised civilian hobbyist tech. They run autopilots that also fly professional drones and can fly planes.

I think it's mostly that it has to be super cheap, otherwise it doesn't bring value (because other weapons are more efficient if you have more money). If your one-way drone costs 10k dollars, maybe it's too expensive even though it can fly during the night.

And then there are fundamental limitations, like flying in bad weather.

> obviously the next stage is a FPV drone with some capabilities of "reusable" drone

But a reusable drone won't go inside a hangar (because at this point it probably won't come out). If your drone can go somewhere, drop something and come back, doesn't it mean that another class of weapons could do this job?

Sadly I think that AI will make a very large difference here. And AI hardware that can control weapons is already hundreds of dollars and dropping fast, because a cell phone can do it.

Western militaries have things like this: https://greydynamics.com/switchblade-drone-small-spring-load...

More autonomy, but MUCH more expensive. Thousands or tens of thousands of dollars per use. The issue is indeed using mass-produced consumer drones. It's a bit like the widespread use of "technicals" in some conflicts: yes, a pickup truck with a .50cal in the back is inferior to tanks or armored cars, but it's also much, much cheaper.

There's a bit of a "Sherman vs. Tiger" thing that's been going on since the dawn of industrialised warfare. Is it better to have a more effective weapon that you can only afford a few of, or lots of cheaper ones?

The US doctrine approach to the problem would simply be a set of B2 bunker buster decapitation strikes on Russian military HQs, but of course that option is not available to Ukraine. They can't even manage Iraq-war-style wave of SEAD strikes followed by unit level CAS. The air war has kind of stalemated with neither side having conventional air superiority and both being vulnerable to the other's anti-air.

$10,000 can be cheap for a one way drone. Bombs often cost for more than that. The real question is value, if hitting the target is worth more than the cost of what you hit it with then you have a good value. Taking out a $1000 drone with a $100,000 missile is a good value if that drone is headed for a $1,000,000 building, but if the drone is headed for a cow probably not worth it.

Ah, the age old question of "1 horse-sized duck vs. 100 duck-sized horses"...

Sure. But isn't that the point of the article? That the author is not sure if they bring as much value as advertised?

Slightly unrelated, but reading the "product" page is crazy to me. So much about lethal radii, kill zones and stuff like that. Wild, couldn't ever picture myself working on something like this and sleeping well at night

This is a Zerg vs Protoss debate.

Switchblade 2 is $80k usd per unit.

And the only reason for that is that as per usual private companies are making a killing.

You and I could build a similarly functioning device in 6 months with a small team. They're not that smart/advanced, imo.

I think most of the money for these things isn't paid for research/engineering but goes into MBA/investor pockets.

I would. But I would be hesitant to if I got wind that it was being sold to a bad government, or that my government was a bad government/intended then for misuse.

As a quiet gay nerd I'd love for there to be no war, no bullies. But unfortunately we live in a world where our species evolved from monkeys and we still often act like it. If my usually peaceful tribe needs weapons to defend itself when attacked then I'm all for it. But using those weapons to attack another for any reason other than defense is a nono in my books.

I was under the impression that while there is a lot of grift, a lot of that was supply chain cost as well. You or I could build one but it would all be sourced in China without vetted supply chain parts or firmware. These Ukraine drones are all off the shelf parts and running who knows what firmware everywhere.

There is also the problem that the military tends to go for the best. In some cases that's a good idea (the cost of getting that laser-guided bomb to the release point is well above the cost of the bomb), but when dealing with unmanned units the zerg approach is very often the winner.

Look at Iron Dome. By comparison to other modern SAMs it's abysmal. But that's by design, Israel wasn't looking for a good SAM. They were looking for the cheapest SAM that could hit a sitting duck. But that's what it's facing--ballistic inbounds that have no countermeasures and no ability to evade.

And the reusable drone has a serious battlefield limitation that it's extremely vulnerable while positioning to drop it's munition. Very good against something that can't defend itself (we have a lot of video of them dropping stuff into tanks that the crew bailed out of for some reason), but the cost mounts quickly if a soldier with a shotgun can engage it.

Also, the tech hurdles can easy be overcome with motherships as relays?

Unfortunately money plays a big role. The US is different, with good paying jobs for engineers being common but believe it or not, that is not the norm everywhere in the world. Sometimes people need to follow the money. I think this plays a big role on the russian side of the war. Their economy isn't very diversified and the state owns the means to a large portion of the economy's production. If you need cash, a good way to get it is to do putin's bidding.

Given that the drones he talks about are even less equipped than a standard hobbyist drone (no GPS, no compass), I suppose it's more a "tradeoff" between keeping the drone cheap enough to be disposable vs having enough functionality to be practically controllable by the operator.

Considerable cost savings can be achieved when both belligerents are using the same parts from the same production line.

China in the role of Milo Minderbender.

It's very easy to mistake one's own government for the good guys.

20 or so years ago, my degree's optionally-mandatory* industrial placement year had me interviewing at Lockheed Martin.

I didn't get it, and in retrospect, given what is now coming to light about UK misbehaviour in Iraq**, I'm glad I didn't.

Unfortunately, I don't know what to do about this, as you're correct about the world we live in.

* tax thing

** https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/5/12/uk-veterans-allege-...

China is partially blocking export of drone parts. More so for Ukraine, so their drones have 50%+ of domestic parts. Custom firmware, even with auto aim for the last 10m where jamming can hit the signal.

I suppose that's true but not necessarily. Most of the control hardware would likely come from Taiwan. Structural components can be machined locally, brushless motors or whatever other mechanism can also be machined locally. Sensors etc are available from Japan/Taiwan as well. But tbf I think it would be possible to source reliable Chinese components from reputable companies as well - try do b2b already and they wouldn't get the sales if the product didn't work. Make purchases through a variety of disposable paper companies and the factories would have no idea that it's for defense.

Software for loitering etc would be so easy nowadays too. Hell I can tell a pi zero to track GPS + multiple cameras + loiter/engage target on whatever signatures are available from available sensors.

I say this while eyeing up the Carvera. I want to justify it so badly. Perhaps the Air...not for aforementioned purposes of course, unless some defense contractor wants to pay me ahaha.

It's easy to identify who is a evil country and who is a victim in Russo-Ukrainian war.

Who is bombing civilians? Shelling cities with inaccurate old missiles? Which cities are destroyed to the ground?

Russian state is pure evil, even worse than Iran.

> You and I could build a similarly functioning device in 6 months with a small team. They're not that smart/advanced, imo.

If you can do what they do in 6 months, why don't you do it? You would get rich easily.

I worked in the drone industry. Everybody thinks everything is easy to do. Spoiler: it isn't.

Best strategy is Protoss + Zerg. What if toss could field some zerglings along with the expensive OP weapons?

If only the majority of the Russian resident population could see that, they would stop Putin.

Propaganda, and arresting dissenters, makes it difficult for the *average* Russian to realise anything is wrong.

But even in free nations, people like to think their soldiers are heroes rather than villains, and reports of crimes are covered up or brushed aside.