Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Tyran wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
The target would need to be an Arab gak tier in competence to fall for that.

A swarm of drones, with C4 or equivalent. they don't even all need to work. Within a city they aren't being 'intercepted'. if you could do something like that in the west, Russia or SE Asia the effects would be phenomenal compared to the effort.

Drones aren't hard too shot down. But more importantly, we don't have the AI needed to make that work.

Against north Korea would work.
A few hundred drones each with a light weight anti tank warhead dropped over head with identifying target AI linked to a camera.
They then fly down and awarm over the armoured formation taking out a large number of targets.

Does not need a complex Ai to target moving targets that meet a certain area and time criteria.
Of not they just self destruct.

What stopping the North Koreans from simply shooting the drones? Assuming they have basic situational awareness.

Drop 200 even with a 10% sucess rate that's 20 less tanks taken out quickly.

 jhe90 wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
The target would need to be an Arab gak tier in competence to fall for that.

A swarm of drones, with C4 or equivalent. they don't even all need to work. Within a city they aren't being 'intercepted'. if you could do something like that in the west, Russia or SE Asia the effects would be phenomenal compared to the effort.

Drones aren't hard too shot down. But more importantly, we don't have the AI needed to make that work.

Against north Korea would work.
A few hundred drones each with a light weight anti tank warhead dropped over head with identifying target AI linked to a camera.
They then fly down and awarm over the armoured formation taking out a large number of targets.

Does not need a complex Ai to target moving targets that meet a certain area and time criteria.
Of not they just self destruct.

What stopping the North Koreans from simply shooting the drones? Assuming they have basic situational awareness.

Drop 200 even with a 10% sucess rate that's 20 less tanks taken out quickly.

Except that you need the drones to fly over the tanks. The north Koreans would have plenty of time to shoot down the drones.

Tyran wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
The target would need to be an Arab gak tier in competence to fall for that.

A swarm of drones, with C4 or equivalent. they don't even all need to work. Within a city they aren't being 'intercepted'. if you could do something like that in the west, Russia or SE Asia the effects would be phenomenal compared to the effort.

Drones aren't hard too shot down. But more importantly, we don't have the AI needed to make that work.

Against north Korea would work.
A few hundred drones each with a light weight anti tank warhead dropped over head with identifying target AI linked to a camera.
They then fly down and awarm over the armoured formation taking out a large number of targets.

Does not need a complex Ai to target moving targets that meet a certain area and time criteria.
Of not they just self destruct.

What stopping the North Koreans from simply shooting the drones? Assuming they have basic situational awareness.

Drop 200 even with a 10% sucess rate that's 20 less tanks taken out quickly.

Except that you need the drones to fly over the tanks. The north Koreans would have plenty of time to shoot down the drones.

Ok maybe more effective at night.

Also not all AA weapons are missiles. AA guns still exist, and with radar they should shred any drone "swarm" with ease.

Tyran wrote:
Also not all AA weapons are missiles. AA guns still exist, and with radar they should shred any drone "swarm" with ease.

If you are prepared and have warning then such efforts are easier but not 100% successful.

No air defence is 100% accurate. Not all are at 100% readiness.

No military serviceman is 100% infallible.

Even in the best situation for the defender they cannot be successful all the time. An attacker only has to be successful once.

If I launched a 100 drones I would be more than happy for expensive guided missiles to be fired at them, and for AA rounds to be chucked up in the air. In fact, targeting my drones means an AA gun has a chance to go into maintenance because of wear.

A radar operating to scan and track drones gets its chance to fail.


Laser CIWS is the thing to beat drone swarms. but it still suffers from being made by the highest bidder at the lowest cost....for the military.


Best hope your chain of command is good enough to give the orders to fire.

 jhe90 wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
The target would need to be an Arab gak tier in competence to fall for that.

A swarm of drones, with C4 or equivalent. they don't even all need to work. Within a city they aren't being 'intercepted'. if you could do something like that in the west, Russia or SE Asia the effects would be phenomenal compared to the effort.

Drones aren't hard too shot down. But more importantly, we don't have the AI needed to make that work.

Against north Korea would work.
A few hundred drones each with a light weight anti tank warhead dropped over head with identifying target AI linked to a camera.
They then fly down and awarm over the armoured formation taking out a large number of targets.

Does not need a complex Ai to target moving targets that meet a certain area and time criteria.
Of not they just self destruct.

Even better, clouds of drones going after individual troops, small vehicles, anything they see. Intelligent mortar rounds, coming with love.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
Also not all AA weapons are missiles. AA guns still exist, and with radar they should shred any drone "swarm" with ease.

If you are prepared and have warning then such efforts are easier but not 100% successful.

No air defence is 100% accurate. Not all are at 100% readiness.

No military serviceman is 100% infallible.

Even in the best situation for the defender they cannot be successful all the time. An attacker only has to be successful once.

If I launched a 100 drones I would be more than happy for expensive guided missiles to be fired at them, and for AA rounds to be chucked up in the air. In fact, targeting my drones means an AA gun has a chance to go into maintenance because of wear.

A radar operating to scan and track drones gets its chance to fail.


Laser CIWS is the thing to beat drone swarms. but it still suffers from being made by the highest bidder at the lowest cost....for the military.


Best hope your chain of command is good enough to give the orders to fire.

Also in regard to a guided missile coming in.
Its also making lots of decoys.

Even if the drones are merely a explosive with some guided fins. Cheap decoys for the real weaponry by clogging up thr flak guns with non vital targets.

And Israel threatened to destroy Assad's AA network.

Tyran wrote:
And Israel threatened to destroy Assad's AA network.

Israel may be back into Syrian airspace to perform a few strikes on targets that directly threaten them, They may light up a few AA sites and C&C centres in order for a strike package to get through.

Destroying a whole network? maybe? possibly? If they didn't hit what they wanted the first time round?

Could be political posturing. Maybe Israel want to get Assad to move on something toward their borders?

Tyran wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
The target would need to be an Arab gak tier in competence to fall for that.

A swarm of drones, with C4 or equivalent. they don't even all need to work. Within a city they aren't being 'intercepted'. if you could do something like that in the west, Russia or SE Asia the effects would be phenomenal compared to the effort.

Drones aren't hard too shot down. But more importantly, we don't have the AI needed to make that work.

Against north Korea would work.
A few hundred drones each with a light weight anti tank warhead dropped over head with identifying target AI linked to a camera.
They then fly down and awarm over the armoured formation taking out a large number of targets.

Does not need a complex Ai to target moving targets that meet a certain area and time criteria.
Of not they just self destruct.

What stopping the North Koreans from simply shooting the drones? Assuming they have basic situational awareness.

If we so much as look at them the wrong way, they'll nuke Seoul. Best not poke the rabid Chihuahua.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
The target would need to be an Arab gak tier in competence to fall for that.

A swarm of drones, with C4 or equivalent. they don't even all need to work. Within a city they aren't being 'intercepted'. if you could do something like that in the west, Russia or SE Asia the effects would be phenomenal compared to the effort.

Drones aren't hard too shot down. But more importantly, we don't have the AI needed to make that work.

Against north Korea would work.
A few hundred drones each with a light weight anti tank warhead dropped over head with identifying target AI linked to a camera.
They then fly down and awarm over the armoured formation taking out a large number of targets.

Does not need a complex Ai to target moving targets that meet a certain area and time criteria.
Of not they just self destruct.

What stopping the North Koreans from simply shooting the drones? Assuming they have basic situational awareness.

If we so much as look at them the wrong way, they'll nuke Seoul. Best not poke the rabid Chihuahua.

To bevutterly honest most of the time you put down a rabid dog.
He cannot be trusted with nukes. The sooner China had him replaced the better.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
And Israel threatened to destroy Assad's AA network.

Israel may be back into Syrian airspace to perform a few strikes on targets that directly threaten them, They may light up a few AA sites and C&C centres in order for a strike package to get through.

Destroying a whole network? maybe? possibly? If they didn't hit what they wanted the first time round?

Could be political posturing. Maybe Israel want to get Assad to move on something toward their borders?

Given some of those units may be Russian...
Nt best idea. No one give a damn if they decided to assinate some terrorist.

but nation states. Diffrrnt ball game.

To bevutterly honest most of the time you put down a rabid dog.
He cannot be trusted with nukes. The sooner China had him replaced the better.

The average rabid dog is not armed with thermo-nuclear weapons. This one is.

How do you propose we go about disarming him of these nuclear weapons without provoking him into launching them?

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
And Israel threatened to destroy Assad's AA network.

Israel may be back into Syrian airspace to perform a few strikes on targets that directly threaten them, They may light up a few AA sites and C&C centres in order for a strike package to get through.

Destroying a whole network? maybe? possibly? If they didn't hit what they wanted the first time round?

Could be political posturing. Maybe Israel want to get Assad to move on something toward their borders?

The actual quote from the Israeli defense minister is:

The next time the Syrians use their air defense systems against our airplanes, we will destroy all of them without thinking twice.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

To bevutterly honest most of the time you put down a rabid dog.
He cannot be trusted with nukes. The sooner China had him replaced the better.

The average rabid dog is not armed with thermo-nuclear weapons. This one is.

How do you propose we go about disarming him of these nuclear weapons without provoking him into launching them?

China...
They don,t want north Korea to become a flood of refugees coming North.
Nore a reunified state.

Now Kim is forcing US to move up Thadd. Missile defences . Chinia not want.

Agreeing to see China reign him in if America holds off bringing up advanced anti nuke weapons and Radars.
They are only country who can.

Hard as it is. Working with China is key.

America should use that as leverage then.

Although, I think you're overestimating the amount of influence China has over him. If they could replace him without blowing up the Korean peninsula, I think they would have done so by now.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

Tyran wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Tyran wrote:
The target would need to be an Arab gak tier in competence to fall for that.

A swarm of drones, with C4 or equivalent. they don't even all need to work. Within a city they aren't being 'intercepted'. if you could do something like that in the west, Russia or SE Asia the effects would be phenomenal compared to the effort.

Drones aren't hard too shot down. But more importantly, we don't have the AI needed to make that work.

Against north Korea would work.
A few hundred drones each with a light weight anti tank warhead dropped over head with identifying target AI linked to a camera.
They then fly down and awarm over the armoured formation taking out a large number of targets.

Does not need a complex Ai to target moving targets that meet a certain area and time criteria.
Of not they just self destruct.

What stopping the North Koreans from simply shooting the drones? Assuming they have basic situational awareness.

If we so much as look at them the wrong way, they'll nuke Seoul. Best not poke the rabid Chihuahua.

And then North Korea becomes radioactive in response.

 Frazzled wrote:
And then North Korea becomes radioactive in response.

So what? The damage will have been done already, South Korea would be wiped off the map along with a large number of US troops.

And I don't think Kim Jong Un cares.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
And then North Korea becomes radioactive in response.

So what? The damage will have been done already, South Korea would be wiped off the map along with a large number of US troops.

And I don't think Kim Jong Un cares.

Um, South Korea will not have been wiped off the map. Please look at a map.

You're actually arguing we should hit them with a first strike...you do know that right?

If Kim Jong Un was really that crazy he'd have done something already. There's no indication he'd be willing to die or see his country (as he envisions it) destroyed. Why everyone is so paranoid about a country that mostly wants to be left alone is beyond me. It's not as if North Korea is going around destabilising large portions of the world. I fail to see the threat many people seem to see in them.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
And then North Korea becomes radioactive in response.

So what? The damage will have been done already, South Korea would be wiped off the map along with a large number of US troops.

And I don't think Kim Jong Un cares.

Um, South Korea will not have been wiped off the map. Please look at a map.

You're actually arguing we should hit them with a first strike...you do know that right?

No I'm not, I'm saying leave the crazy fethers armed with Nukes alone in their little corner of the world.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
And then North Korea becomes radioactive in response.

So what? The damage will have been done already, South Korea would be wiped off the map along with a large number of US troops.

And I don't think Kim Jong Un cares.

Um, South Korea will not have been wiped off the map. Please look at a map.

You're actually arguing we should hit them with a first strike...you do know that right?

No I'm not, I'm saying leave the crazy fethers armed with Nukes alone in their little corner of the world.

To be clear, we're not the ones shooting missiles into Japanese waters and threatening to nuke the West Coast. While I am no fan of California, I'd view that slightly unfavorably.

 Frazzled wrote:


To be clear, we're not the ones shooting missiles into Japanese waters and threatening to nuke the West Coast. While I am no fan of California, I'd view that slightly unfavorably.

North Korea couldn't hit a barn whilst they were inside with all the doors and windows closed.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:


To be clear, we're not the ones shooting missiles into Japanese waters and threatening to nuke the West Coast. While I am no fan of California, I'd view that slightly unfavorably.

North Korea couldn't hit a barn whilst they were inside with all the doors and windows closed.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I remember way back in 98' when the N. Korean's put a missile right over Misawa Air Base (where I was living at the time), just to show they could.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
And then North Korea becomes radioactive in response.

So what? The damage will have been done already, South Korea would be wiped off the map along with a large number of US troops.

And I don't think Kim Jong Un cares.

Um, South Korea will not have been wiped off the map. Please look at a map.

You're actually arguing we should hit them with a first strike...you do know that right?

No, but it is believed that millions of S. Korean's would be killed in the opening stages of the fight.



An image of how N. Korea could saturate S. Korea with artillery fire.

 djones520 wrote:


I wouldn't be so sure about that. I remember way back in 98' when the N. Korean's put a missile right over Misawa Air Base (where I was living at the time), just to show they could.

Alternatively, they meant it to go somewhere else and got lucky

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:


To be clear, we're not the ones shooting missiles into Japanese waters and threatening to nuke the West Coast. While I am no fan of California, I'd view that slightly unfavorably.

North Korea couldn't hit a barn whilst they were inside with all the doors and windows closed.

Yea but when the Zombie plague comes they are ready!

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:


To be clear, we're not the ones shooting missiles into Japanese waters and threatening to nuke the West Coast. While I am no fan of California, I'd view that slightly unfavorably.

North Korea couldn't hit a barn whilst they were inside with all the doors and windows closed.

Maybe so with their Missiles... but their amassed artillery? They don't need to... it'll be a modern version of this:


And, S. Korea and the US military will take a hammering....

 Frazzled wrote:

And then North Korea becomes radioactive in response.

Which feth up South Korea even more, because guess were the winds are pushing all that radioactivity.

Tyran wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

And then North Korea becomes radioactive in response.

Which feth up South Korea even more, because guess were the winds are pushing all that radioactivity.

Towards Japan. Wind flow is typically west to east in the Northern Hemisphere.

Tyran wrote:
Also not all AA weapons are missiles. AA guns still exist, and with radar they should shred any drone "swarm" with ease.

There's a lot of issues with that. The most effective AA systems would be things like a quad .50 MAXON mount. They still exist, but most militaries, even gakky third world ones, don't use them anymore. The other really big issue is range. For something like that to work, A) it'd almost have to be sitting on the target. B) Assuming that you're spraying right at it, you still have the large issue of how many of a swarm can you hit before it crosses the intervening distance and blows your ass away? I'm going to say with certainty, it's not 100% of them.

Let's crunch some numbers:

The cost of a Zumwalt: approx 1.4 billion US dollars.
The cost of a high end quadcopter drone: approx $500 US dollars.


So, we're talking a swarm of 2,800,000 drones, each carrying about 1/2 pound of C4.

Assuming only a 10% success rate, that's 280000 drones delivering 140,000 pounds of C4 on target, with no military personnel in harms way. Personally I think that initial deployments would see a much higher rate of success, as initially, militaries would attempt to deal with it with weapons on hand, rather than specialized systems designed to defeat it.

However, swamping an air defense system with targets is a basic element to US aerial superiority in the first hours of pretty much any war they fight. Cruise missiles and talds on runways and SAM sites is pretty textbook at this point. It works fairly well.



Also remember that, when discussing Korea, North Korea has chemical weapon batteries trained on all civilian centers in the south. The possible number of civies lost is very high, with VX etc in the mix.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Alternatively, they meant it to go somewhere else and got lucky

I think it was a hit. NK has also sunk ships, etc, during the ceasefire.

Range of Zumwalt cannon: 83 nautical miles. Range of Amazon Brigade: less than 83 nautical miles.