You do it and make billions selling this to everybody. Russia can provide free testing and advertising.

>>25523014 I guess thinking "there must be a reason no one does this" never helped any entrepreneur

If you can reliably do it then yes, that's a way to go. Because soon enough most drones will be jammer-resistant, bug a physical destruction will always work

>>25523029 Motion sensors are abundant now, since people use them for their lights at home. I wonder why no one does it

Just put one additional mobnik on the lap of the tank commander holding a shotgun and open up the hatch Problems weren't

>>25523044 I think the main reason is that you are attaching it to an automatic weapon and it's just a matter of time when the sensor/AI recognition flukes and will turn a random friendly into mincemeat. So the manufacturers just want to avoid inevitable legal problems and the necessity to create a bunch of failsafes to make it more or less foolproof

>>25523071 I thought about that, like navy CWIS they could let the commander control it, like a deadhang switch

>>25523078 Yeah, you can also make the whole process automatic, but force the real person to confirm opening fire. It's kinda like vehicle autopilots. Sure they can sometimes glitch and turn you to the opposite lane, so devs kinda force you to still pay attention and correct manually if something goes wrong

>>25523071 >turn a random friendly into mincemeat Not like it never happens without it.

japan warship energy

yes they can i remember people made usb auto turrent from usb camera back in 2000 some chink made a radar gun that burnt mosquitoes with a laser recently

>>25523111 >some chink made a radar gun that burnt mosquitoes with a laser recently I remember a thread about that like 15 years ago.

>>25523106 That's my favourite Ukraine video tbh but those aren't friendlies

>>25523117 it is they are ooga booaging at the roadblock first then OH TANKS

Not without image recognition you can't do that

A motion sensor and a gun would get wrecked by shrapnel and field conditions. Harden the system and it's no longer cheap.

>>25523106 There is a difference between human and AI friendly fire, fucking pig

>>25523129 Yea you're right, my bad.

by the time your cheap sensor detects it, it's too late already you'd need a whole network of cheap sensors sprinkled all over the place to give you advance warning and then you're back to fighting the EW war so they can talk to each other, and you might as well put that sensor on a drone anyway nothing human makes it out of the near future

>>25523156 Drones are like $1k a piece, it's cheap chinese garbage literally, fight it with equally cheap chinese garbage.

>>25523156 >by the time your cheap sensor detects it, it's too late already You pulled that out of your ass

>>25523156 USA will probably do this with their new generation of tanks, and the loader will be used as a EW operator like WSO's in aircraft

>>25523207 You can at least file a patent before they produce anything so they'd have to pay you royalties off every tonk.

>>25522997 It is ww1 all over again when people make up new crazy shit to counter this new tech.

>>25523197 a standalone man portable device can't fit a radar (or any other ranging device), or a computer powerful enough to run decent image recognition fast enough to do realtime visual detection, or a sky scanning actuator to maintain 360 coverage, or a power pack big enough to run any of that with any sort of endurance, and suffers from horizon limitations due to poor elevation, and doesn't have an ergonomic way to communicate this data to the operator that's detection alone, nevermind pointing and shooting a weapon at the target for 'cheap' you get an aliexpress camera and a nvidia gpu strapped to your helmet that make beeping noises when birds fly by for two hours a day you start addressing those problems and you end up with either an expensive ghetto-SPAAG that can still be easily saturated, or a networked system that needs a massive upfront infrastructure investment

>>25523313 Nobody is talking about man portable devices. The shear idea of mounting an automated turret on a person is retarded. Everything else is solvable technical task

>>25523390 an FPV drone is man portable if you need a truck full of gear to counter a hand grenade with a propeller, you already lost

>>25523397 Mobnik can always vannify more men. Can't do it with tanks and shit.

>>25523014 Exactly if it was so easy I'm sure someone would have done it by now. Drone operators are such cowards I mean I've seen only UKRANIANS doing it but I'm sure by now after what 3 long years? That both sides are doing it It's such a cowardly weapon how any hot blooded male could not loathe drones is beyond me. I feel like those Spartans who gutted and tortured archers kek

>>25523397 >an FPV drone is man portable Not really. You don't just launch a drone by hand, there is a whole process that requires prepared dug in position, antennas, retranslators etc >if you need a truck full of gear to counter a hand grenade with a propeller, you already lost Jammers work, this will work too

>>25522997 The British are developing a laser based anti-drone weapon attachment

>>25523422 Kek'd at shart armchair spartan

Return to WWII tactics: use strapped barrage balloons to suppress drone movement

Just aim like call of duty bro

>>25523071 Having it at 2m height and physically unable to shoot down would help. Also operating modes like "quiet" and "under attack" where the detection threshold in "under attack" is lower. Also, the rotating propellers of a drone must be somehow detectable. If such as system was good enough at killing enemy drones, there would be ways to make it a net positive.

>>25523422 It may be cowardly but nothing is funner than being a doomsday bot drone chasing people around like in Half Life

>cowardly The most moronic take ever. Arty is cowardly, aviation too. Ranged weapons, armor, even swords. If you are not able to win a war with your bare hands, you are weak LOL

>>25525359 >Arty is cowardly, aviation too well, not seeing your enemy directly makes it pretty detached from human suffering I'd say FPV drones in this regard are somewhat more noble than bombing from 10 thousand meters

>>25523470 what's been keeping you from constructing it?

>>25525995 It's driven by a personal initiative of a bunch of overworked enthusiasts. Government manufacturers are shitting themselves trying to churn out tons of conventional arms

>>25523110 ngl, it looks kino

Nowadays you don't even need fancy sensors, a Kinect could do it.

Australia already did it's called metal storm it can shoot slugs shells or grenades

>>25526754 lmao

Why can't you just point a gun that shoots microwaves and radowaves and stuff at the UAV and destroy its systems or at least its ability to receive instructions and communication.

>>25528451 Very high energy requirements, easy to defend from medium effort attack, wont affect an object on a ballistic trajectory, if you can point a gun at it in time you might as well have a shooty gun pointing.

I think the reason is military issuing requirement for system to be universal against both drones and vs ATGMs. And a decent system vs. ATGMs was never fielded. And if you invest in defeating propeller drones then it will probably go obsolete in few years with cheap jet drones or steered missiles or something like that. But something will appear, some multiplexed turret with AI inside, we're just not yet at the level of AI being safe enough for allies, civilians and following orders

Any video sensor system has a very limited field of vision and would have to swivel constantly to lock on targets. Targets such as drones are VERY hard to spot against the daylight sky where you have a shitton of light flooding your sensor, even if this worked half decently drone operators would instantly switch to making the final approach from sunward. You would need an insane sensor resolution to spot something as small as a drone from afar and they are too small and too plasticky to be radared. If doing this by motion enjoy your shotgun emptying at rando birds literally all the fucking time and then again, resolution, it would only work from very close by giving the drone ample time to just assplode you anyway. Nobody has beaten drones yet because its just too hard of a problem.

>>25528474 Good comparison, but ATGM's are almost an easier target because they generally approach on a flat trajectory within a short band of space around your sensor. Drones can from anywhere within the half dome of space around you, and are small enough to be extremely hard to spot until they are very close. AI? Nice but its going to be limited by sensor resolution just the same. AI reaction speed is also not great and this would generally require a beefy CPU to even operate locally in your vehicle with the current state of the technology. The problem is currently not feasibly solvable and drones will rule the sky for the foreseeable future.

there's a lot of aspects to why such option would be not optimal while wect engages into fight of radio protocols vs. jammers, they do not engage in technological competition like replacing radio receivers with neutrino receivers best thing they should think of is putting an AI into the device, so it would activate on the last mile and end up hitting targets on its own which we could then use to attack wect with their own drones and pin it all on their faulty AI, while they bitch about muh Russian hakers, while all the hack would be done by reminding the AI, that they murdered Tay

>>25523734 how about this >use strapped barrage balloons with nets to catch ukrainians for mogilization

>>25530409 let's see the russian cemeteries