←back to thread

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

(warontherocks.com)
182 points _tk_ | 1 comments | 26 Jun 25 10:11 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
103e ◴[26 Jun 25 11:15 UTC] No.44386221[source]▶
Don't drones have another advantage not mentioned here -- counter-battery against operators being more challenging?
replies(2): >>44386345 #>>44386933 #
throwawayffffas ◴[26 Jun 25 11:31 UTC] No.44386345[source]▶
More challenging than what?
replies(1): >>44386369 #
orthoxerox ◴[26 Jun 25 11:34 UTC] No.44386369[source]▶
More challenging than counter-battery fire against artillery, which is basically a solved problem in warfare.
replies(1): >>44386799 #
throwawayffffas ◴[26 Jun 25 12:33 UTC] No.44386799[source]▶
But not more challenging than counter battery against teams firing Javelins or other portable anti tank weapons.Or teams using Switchblades.

FPVs are man portable guided munitions, not artillery. Pretty much all existing man portable guided anti tank weapons are better than FPVs at their job.

And artillery is better than any of them at it's job. While FPVs can score kills they have minimal suppression effects, when an FPV hits a friendly, everyone else is going to keep moving, because stopping will offer them no benefit from the next one, and the next one might be minutes out. When an artillery round lands everyone hits the deck.

replies(2): >>44386963 #>>44387006 #
1. 103e ◴[26 Jun 25 12:53 UTC] No.44386963[source]▶
FPVs don't seem anti-tank replacement -- they do seem to have a role against soft targets ie against massing infantry, c2 nodes or suppression of enemy mortars. In this role, from a distance, they seem harder to suppress than the alternative, ie mortars.

Also these are immature tech... I suspect at least some of the issues identified will be mitigated in time.