←back to thread

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

(warontherocks.com)
183 points _tk_ | 10 comments | 26 Jun 25 10:11 UTC | HN request time: 0.575s | source | bottom
Show context
varjag ◴[26 Jun 25 11:23 UTC] No.44386284[source]▶
This tracks with the earlier ~12% drone kill efficiency estimates. However drone is a mass deployment weapon. Ukraine did about 2 million frontline sorties in 2024 and aims for 5 million this year. This 1 out of 9 ratio translates into absolutely devastating damage, that artillery and airstrikes (which are also hardly "easy to use") can only dream of.
replies(1): >>44386456 #
Neil44 ◴[26 Jun 25 11:47 UTC] No.44386456[source]▶
This is true, but the author also talks about cost e.g. $500 for a drone vs $100 for an artillery shell with far more effect. Surely at the point where the drone has visual on the target you can fire 5 x shells over for massively greater effect on target, and keep the drone flying for the next target, and the next.
replies(2): >>44386520 #>>44389163 #
1. varjag ◴[26 Jun 25 11:54 UTC] No.44386520[source]▶
$100 is a cost of a 60mm mortar shell. It is a hand grenade sized munition lobbed from a Pringles can sized weapon to the range of 1-2km. This is generally not the thing that comes to mind when you think of artillery strike.

A 155mm (dumb, unguided) shell would set you back 5-8K USD. That's before the propellant charge, fuse and amortization of the artillery piece and its 5 man crew.

replies(3): >>44386849 #>>44387861 #>>44387967 #
2. Neil44 ◴[26 Jun 25 12:40 UTC] No.44386849[source]▶
That's interesting thankyou. It's a good google rabbit hole. Apparently we're in surge pricing right now because of Ukraine, and Russian shells are only costing them $1000. It seems they caught us sleeping, manufacturing wise.
replies(1): >>44386988 #
3. varjag ◴[26 Jun 25 12:57 UTC] No.44386988[source]▶
The heavy Soivet calibre used by Russia is 152mm which translates to a slightly cheaper shell (though not 5x for sure). Russia also uses 122mm arty which is substantially cheaper: the costs follow to the cube volume. Another factor is that a lot of supplies are Iranian and North Korean old stock with what we can assume reasonable prices. Ukraine was getting Vietnam war era 155mm stock relatively cheap too, while it lasted.
4. hnaccount_rng ◴[26 Jun 25 14:36 UTC] No.44387861[source]▶
Then again the payload of an FPV is much more comparable to the mortar round than to the 155mm one
replies(2): >>44388044 #>>44388642 #
5. bluGill ◴[26 Jun 25 14:45 UTC] No.44387967[source]▶
A M107 155mm round weights 95lbs when launched. Assuming that is pure lead (this is false, but lead is very cheap and it gives us numbers to work with) I can buy lead ignots for $2.89/lbs. Which puts us at $293 per rounds in just materials. Since we assume the other materials cost money too, plus there is the energy used to turn ignots into a round, it seems unlikely you can get the cost to much under $1000 no matter how good your mass production is.
replies(1): >>44388123 #
6. tclancy ◴[26 Jun 25 14:53 UTC] No.44388044[source]▶
But theoretically much better aimed. Don’t know if there’s enough data here to do the math. Plus that it’s a bit gauche to do math about human lives, but here we are.
replies(1): >>44389319 #
7. beAbU ◴[26 Jun 25 15:02 UTC] No.44388123[source]▶
And then you need to add that 5-10x government contract price multiplier to the cost as well.
8. varjag ◴[26 Jun 25 15:57 UTC] No.44388642[source]▶
An FPV drone can take out a tank, missile erector-launcher or a dugout. Kinda hard with 60mm mortar.
9. Nicook ◴[26 Jun 25 17:17 UTC] No.44389319{3}[source]▶
don't need to aim a large shell as accurately though.
replies(1): >>44390609 #
10. varjag ◴[26 Jun 25 19:44 UTC] No.44390609{4}[source]▶
It averages out at 8-10 shells to kill or disable one soldier.