←back to thread

182 points _tk_ | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.213s | source
Show context
palata ◴[] No.44386402[source]
I see a lot of comments saying that "but the technology will improve".

Sure, maybe. Or maybe it will be like Musk announcing what Teslas will be capable of in 6 months. We don't know, and the author doesn't pretend that they do. Don't forget that drones have been used in this war for years, and the vast majority of the drone industry has already pivoted to the military because it's easier to make money there. So it's not exactly "brand new technology".

But my point is that the author just says "from what I've seen, here is how it looks". And it seems like it has value.

replies(3): >>44386955 #>>44387069 #>>44391012 #
mopsi ◴[] No.44391012[source]
> I see a lot of comments saying that "but the technology will improve".

When people say "the technology will improve", I think they're usually referring to the drones currently in use becoming much better not due to breakthroughs in technology, but by applying existing technology more effectively for military purposes. Current military drones used in Ukraine are inefficient conversions of civilian products that were never meant to operate under jamming, leave as small thermal signature as possible, etc. Original military designs, which are optimized for the battlefield rather than the local dog park, can be significantly better.

replies(1): >>44392523 #
1. palata ◴[] No.44392523[source]
> Current military drones used in Ukraine are inefficient conversions of civilian products

Are you sure about that? Many drone companies have been engineering for the military for years before the Ukraine invasion in 2022.

The thing is, those FPV drones are super, super, super cheap. We do have better technology, it does exist. But it is more expensive. Is it worth it then? That's the question.