It isn't just drones that would get hammered and I beg to differ about it being a great idea and worth the patriotic 'inconvenience'. Not all military bases are way out in the back of beyond - the majority of military infrastructure is within a few miles of population centres.Regarding the concerns about the jamming of 2.4 and 5.8 frequencies and its effect on unrelated electronics.......I don't really care. I'd rather have the drone frequencies jammed (and losing my wifi access in the process) than allow the drones to have unimpeded access to the military facilities.
I checked out the website. Looks effective.Back to Felix's comments regarding collateral damage to wifi networks. The examples summarized are inconveniences.....with the exception of hospitals. Those hospitals have ethernets that can be relied on. Further, neither police nor military are on the 2.9 and 5.8 frequency bands. The problems cited by Felix are relatively insignificant as compared to the national security threat that the drones may pose. Check out the post on this site: "High-Power microwave force field knocks drone swarms from sky.
Autonomous DJI Waypoint Missions set to continue in the event of signal loss should also still continue, but not if GPS is also blocked.AI will thwart jammers- autonomous drones using it don’t necessarily need GPS and remote control to navigate once they are deployed. Similar to what some cruise missiles and the Mars rover landers do, a drone swarm could utilize dead reckoning by topography and visual cues from the land to navigate.
Iran used GPS jamming and spoofing to capture US drones. The only way to avoid this is for a drone to use terrain mapping and dead reckoning.Autonomous DJI Waypoint Missions set to continue in the event of signal loss should also still continue, but not if GPS is also blocked.
It is - the Leonidas has been fielded by the US Military, though not currently within the Continental USI checked out the website. Looks effective.
That’s the same as wire guided missiles, which are old tech. Earlier ones just required you to hold a sight on your target, later ones had you paint a target with a laser and the missile follows it while trailing a control wire behind it. SAMs use the same method. All of these have a limited range unlike what terrain following fully autonomous cruise missiles and AI enabled drones could achieve.I think we have all heard about fiber optic drones.
You make many good points. But these pilots fly their jets every day to train. NORAD called in the jets to take down the weather balloon. A lot of people think they should have done it much sooner. Remember that car sized drones flew over Langley AFB at 100 mph for 17 days straight. They flew directly over the rows and rows of 40 F-22 Raptors @$300 million per copy. I would think that about two nights into it would be time to summon direct air support to confirm and track the drones if they cannot do it electronically from ground. Check this out, retired Lt. Commander Alex Dietrich describes witnessing firsthand the famous tic tac UAP/UFO.NORAD and the men and women that protect our skies have a mission that is both necessary and constant. We certainly need to protect our military bases and interests.
I will however say whomever is creating reactionary plans for investigating "lights" or "incursions" needs to be either fired or enrolled in an economics class.
Assigning a couple of F-15's to investigate a "UFO" is the same as running out there and throwing stacks of money in the air hoping to scare the offender away. I am a veteran I know very well that every branch of the military has a few Beechcrafts lying around.
F-15:..... 90 Million. Cost per hour: 30 grand
Beech T-6C:.... 5 million. Cost per hour 500 bucks.
I too am proud of our military and it awesome tech but as a taxpayer I must say I would rather you leave the fancy stuff in the hanger.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.