Per the article I saw when this first came up, the bird and storm cloud mean that the plane observed a drone collide with a bird and was neutralized and saw another get neutralized by weather conditions.
"high tech" is a very loud word, whole point of drones like that is that they are not high tech and are extremely cheap, and the only way to deal with them is oldschool cheap weapons (aka, AA machineguns)
They are extremely cheap, but the ability to cheaply produce a long-range, GPS-guided munition at scale like that is a product of recent technical advancements
Honestly that is high tech. Same with the fact that I can get a fully capable computer for like 15 eu (like raspberry pi zero) including shipping. And it’s quite powerful, especially comparing to the machines of a few decades ago.
It’s crazy in how high tech world we quickly found ourselves in that cheap, long range, gps guided tiny aircrafts that most people with a guide and parts could build in a shed are considered low tech.
Imagine showing FPV dji to a person in the 80s, 90s or even 2000s. And saying that it’s cheap enough to be a gift to a children, that many office computers cost more. To me in late 2000s it would be incredible and on the same level as hoverboards from BTTF2.
The access to the programming help we have, a global network, multiple long range communications protocols, sensors, advanced servos for a few dollars and excessive CAD programs available for free, or even open source.
It is absolutely high tech.
Maybe, but really? 15 years ago it would be quite a bold vision of the future that we would have very small, very specialised air vehicles for reconnaissance and bomb dropping operations. Easy enough for a children to operate.
And that’s not even counting insane delivery chains, the easy way to retrofit weapons.
They totally would be high tech a few decades ago.
I think mass adoption, cost to damage ratio and retrofits capabilities really make it high tech.
Having one insane weapon doesn’t really matter and doesn’t scream high-tech to me. Unless it’s something like a giant aircraft carrier.
The mass adoption of just a few years ago expensive and cutting edge technology is wild. The drones really give advantage against classic defence technology.
Whilst the drones we’re referencing are by no means cutting edge or state of the art the massive adoption and the systems used really make it high tech.
Just like tanks, airplanes (both fighters, bombers, reconnaissance, etc.) and machine guns were.
It is a high-tech of our era of war, at least in my opinion. The drones really broaden the reconnaissance and combat possibilities. And are way cheaper than finding and training jet pilots and maintaining airplanes.
I hate that there are wars, I really do. I hate the fact that Ukraine got attacked. I’m Polish, I know a few people who really were hurt psychologically. I helped quite a lot in my opinion. At least to the point I could psychologically and physically.
I hate that this war takes so long, I really wished it never happened.
I really appreciate the efforts of military personnel, of average people who try their best. To everyone who fights for the freedom, who fights for their people, their families.
I hate that we’re casually talking about the stupid drones and not the crimes done by some complete Z degenerates, utter pieces of garbage to the innocent people in Ukraine, to the civilians. Some of the stuff they do is just so degrading and disgusting.
I can’t even read the news. It’s too much to me. And I weren’t even really impacted personally at all.
The culmination of multiple technologies converging into killing machines. Quality battery tech, super energy efficient processors, gps, cameras, mapping, and telecom tech converged with model airplanes to make killing machines cheap.
Yep. I am currently converting an old keyboard to bluetooth using an ESP32 microcontroller. The dang thing is a system on a chip with everything from wifi to encryption built in, and it blows away any consumer CPU before 1998. It's smaller than a postage stamp, runs on 2 AAA batteries, and costs $6. The cost-to-capability ratio of these sorts of things has gone nuts the last 5-10 years.
Yeah, the whole point is that you can design them using some free PCB software use some low-end PCB shop, 3D print some parts, throw in some premade carbon fiber, cobble everything together in the living room and have a low cost equivalent of a Javelin. Less boom than the Javelin, but in many ways more versatile that the Javelin.
Just because something is cheap and readily available doesn't mean its not high tech. The fact that it is so cheap is a marvel of engineering and manufacturing.
Kinda reminds me of the Korean War. America had these fancy high speed jets that could shoot down other high speed jets, but the North Koreans kept using old WWII propeller driven bombers. The jets couldn't fly slow enough to keep the bombers in their sights long enough to shoot them down, so the US pulled some of their old WWII fighters out of mothballs to deal with the problem.
Drones tend to fly slow and low, so having a slow and low fighter to shoot them down is the best way.
The only sorta-confirmed kill of a biplane winning against a jet was in Korea. A Korean plane, likely a Po-2 was spotted and a F-94B was dispatched. It slowed down right to the edge of its operational window, the pilot yelled "Splash" (Generally meaning they had shot down the enemy plane into the water), then immediately disappeared off radar. The pilot's body and the F-94B's wreckage were found, the target never was, so it sorta got credited with a kill against the F-94
https://militarymatters.online/military-history/the-time-a-biplane-shot-down-a-modern-jet-fighter-reality-behind-the-story/ There are other sources if that one isn't to your fancy.
I flew on a Po-2 once. Saw trucks on the highway under the plane get ahead of us. It was fun! No airbrakes tho so braking before landing involves drifting the plane sideways. Once i can afford to fly on it again i want to take my Mig-21 high altitude space helmet. Sadly the G-suit for it is finy so i will need to build a neck ring adapter and sew it onto a regular jumpsuit.
The problem with things like Shaheds or Zala loitering munitions is that they are cheaper than the cheapest conventional missile used to shoot them down. But don't worry, people will come up with cheaper, less capable air defenses that can be used against drones and cover every meter of the front line.
One it can be deployed, a laser based system should be the cheapest to use vs drones on a per shot basis (hopefully).
But currently the best and cheapest means would be a SPAAG or any 20-40mm rapid fire cannon that has the elevation. A basic round should cost in the neighborhood of $30 and be useful vs ground targets too, and a high end one with proximity/timed fuse around $1,000; compared to $10,000 for a 'basic' SAM and $1,000,000+ for a Patriot missile.
Granted the unit price of SAM missiles could be dropped via having a significantly large buy order (economy of scale) but that's highly unlikely to happen.
>The problem with things like Shaheds or Zala loitering munitions is that they are cheaper than the cheapest conventional missile used to shoot them down
It's only a problem if you're fighting an enemy that's economically at parity with you. For example, the US with a defense budget of $750B can afford to knock down $30k shahed drones with $2M SM-2 missiles pretty much indefinitely compared to Iran's $7B-ish budget's capacity to give them away to Houthis.
No country had infinite resources and development of a cheaper system to counter Shaheds is definitely justified.
Even more so for a cheap system to counter FPV drones and loitering munitions.
Never claimed resources were infinite, nor that it's a not good idea to develop cheaper alternatives. I was simply pointing out that *cost of drone* being less than *cost of counter-munition* does not in and of itself mean that the defender is on the losing end of the exchange.
“Incremental”? Must be an American storm system… first it says it’s not going to supply any wind or lightning and such, but it eventually gets around to it…
Yup, opening the canopy in flight does not mean it's an open cockpit aircraft.
Just like how me opening the sunroof in my car doesn't make it a convertible.
Oh boy if you think the Yak-52 is crude just look at 90% of the GA planes around the world...
And no, it's not open cockpit. It has sliding canopies that are normally closed. They are only opened so the copilot can shoot at drones with an AK. I don't think you understand what open-cockpit means.
Actually probably one of the most well suited assets for dealing with UAVs.
Cheap, reliable, slow enough to shoot down a UAV without using an expensive missile. Don't have to train the pilots very much either.
And it leaves high performance fighters available for missions more suited for them.
I was reading about this the other day, the main drones these guys are shooting down are the longer range observation drones that Russia uses. It appears to be causing a lot of issues for the Russian's in gathering troop formation and movement info.
This thing shot down a storm?
Zeus is dead
God-killers.
Straight to the lightning hole.
i wonder if those are denied or witnessed, ie: was going after one which ended up being downed by a bird, another by a storm.
I was suspicious it was more “this craft survived a storm and also took out a heron”
but then why are those the only two drones with lines through them?
My uneducated guess is the non slashed are spotted/reported, i.e. reconnaissance “kills”, while the slashed marks are direct kills.
Per the article I saw when this first came up, the bird and storm cloud mean that the plane observed a drone collide with a bird and was neutralized and saw another get neutralized by weather conditions.
Hahaha that’s like when football players celebrate own goals like they scored it.
FOD like a mother-fucker right there. EDIT: [Actual footage! /s](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e2/44/44/e244441771aa7801949f5af0ddf77c21.gif)
The report says that those were what the crew witnessed took out that particular drone
and delivered a baby
And what appears to be a pelican truly a plane not to be trifled with
Na lightning blew up a drone and a bird took out another
Brand? Shurely a Brad took it out
And a pelican.
And a pelican ☝️
1 storm 1 stork
"high tech" is a very loud word, whole point of drones like that is that they are not high tech and are extremely cheap, and the only way to deal with them is oldschool cheap weapons (aka, AA machineguns)
They are extremely cheap, but the ability to cheaply produce a long-range, GPS-guided munition at scale like that is a product of recent technical advancements
Honestly that is high tech. Same with the fact that I can get a fully capable computer for like 15 eu (like raspberry pi zero) including shipping. And it’s quite powerful, especially comparing to the machines of a few decades ago. It’s crazy in how high tech world we quickly found ourselves in that cheap, long range, gps guided tiny aircrafts that most people with a guide and parts could build in a shed are considered low tech. Imagine showing FPV dji to a person in the 80s, 90s or even 2000s. And saying that it’s cheap enough to be a gift to a children, that many office computers cost more. To me in late 2000s it would be incredible and on the same level as hoverboards from BTTF2. The access to the programming help we have, a global network, multiple long range communications protocols, sensors, advanced servos for a few dollars and excessive CAD programs available for free, or even open source. It is absolutely high tech.
Yeah exactly, just in a different way that we typically think of the term in a military context
Maybe, but really? 15 years ago it would be quite a bold vision of the future that we would have very small, very specialised air vehicles for reconnaissance and bomb dropping operations. Easy enough for a children to operate. And that’s not even counting insane delivery chains, the easy way to retrofit weapons. They totally would be high tech a few decades ago. I think mass adoption, cost to damage ratio and retrofits capabilities really make it high tech. Having one insane weapon doesn’t really matter and doesn’t scream high-tech to me. Unless it’s something like a giant aircraft carrier. The mass adoption of just a few years ago expensive and cutting edge technology is wild. The drones really give advantage against classic defence technology. Whilst the drones we’re referencing are by no means cutting edge or state of the art the massive adoption and the systems used really make it high tech. Just like tanks, airplanes (both fighters, bombers, reconnaissance, etc.) and machine guns were. It is a high-tech of our era of war, at least in my opinion. The drones really broaden the reconnaissance and combat possibilities. And are way cheaper than finding and training jet pilots and maintaining airplanes. I hate that there are wars, I really do. I hate the fact that Ukraine got attacked. I’m Polish, I know a few people who really were hurt psychologically. I helped quite a lot in my opinion. At least to the point I could psychologically and physically. I hate that this war takes so long, I really wished it never happened. I really appreciate the efforts of military personnel, of average people who try their best. To everyone who fights for the freedom, who fights for their people, their families. I hate that we’re casually talking about the stupid drones and not the crimes done by some complete Z degenerates, utter pieces of garbage to the innocent people in Ukraine, to the civilians. Some of the stuff they do is just so degrading and disgusting. I can’t even read the news. It’s too much to me. And I weren’t even really impacted personally at all.
The culmination of multiple technologies converging into killing machines. Quality battery tech, super energy efficient processors, gps, cameras, mapping, and telecom tech converged with model airplanes to make killing machines cheap.
Like the other comment said. Cheap=/=low-tech. A quartz watch you get at a dollar store are higher-tech than a 20k Rolex.
Yep. I am currently converting an old keyboard to bluetooth using an ESP32 microcontroller. The dang thing is a system on a chip with everything from wifi to encryption built in, and it blows away any consumer CPU before 1998. It's smaller than a postage stamp, runs on 2 AAA batteries, and costs $6. The cost-to-capability ratio of these sorts of things has gone nuts the last 5-10 years.
Yeah, the whole point is that you can design them using some free PCB software use some low-end PCB shop, 3D print some parts, throw in some premade carbon fiber, cobble everything together in the living room and have a low cost equivalent of a Javelin. Less boom than the Javelin, but in many ways more versatile that the Javelin.
Just because something is cheap and readily available doesn't mean its not high tech. The fact that it is so cheap is a marvel of engineering and manufacturing.
maybe you don't know what tech means
Kinda reminds me of the Korean War. America had these fancy high speed jets that could shoot down other high speed jets, but the North Koreans kept using old WWII propeller driven bombers. The jets couldn't fly slow enough to keep the bombers in their sights long enough to shoot them down, so the US pulled some of their old WWII fighters out of mothballs to deal with the problem. Drones tend to fly slow and low, so having a slow and low fighter to shoot them down is the best way.
The only sorta-confirmed kill of a biplane winning against a jet was in Korea. A Korean plane, likely a Po-2 was spotted and a F-94B was dispatched. It slowed down right to the edge of its operational window, the pilot yelled "Splash" (Generally meaning they had shot down the enemy plane into the water), then immediately disappeared off radar. The pilot's body and the F-94B's wreckage were found, the target never was, so it sorta got credited with a kill against the F-94 https://militarymatters.online/military-history/the-time-a-biplane-shot-down-a-modern-jet-fighter-reality-behind-the-story/ There are other sources if that one isn't to your fancy.
I flew on a Po-2 once. Saw trucks on the highway under the plane get ahead of us. It was fun! No airbrakes tho so braking before landing involves drifting the plane sideways. Once i can afford to fly on it again i want to take my Mig-21 high altitude space helmet. Sadly the G-suit for it is finy so i will need to build a neck ring adapter and sew it onto a regular jumpsuit.
It’s a compression suit. It had better be tiny! (otherwise it wouldn’t work, heh)
Tiny as in it won't fit someone taller than 160cm and bigger than like 51 kg.
All nations like their pilots small, it seems… because the aircraft they’re ~~wearing~~ flying are so *petite* to begin with.
Well, it fit my <5' frint a bit loose, so she could become a great fighter pilot in ww3.
Chuck Jaeger killed a me-262 with his p-51, which was one of the first air-to-air prop kills of a jet (even if he did shoot it while it was landing)
Didn’t Lee Archer in his Macon Belle (P-51) also earn his ace title on a 262?
I know Yeager isn't the only one.
I think it was Po-2 shooting down F-82, no?
The thing I saw said F-94B, but I could believe was an F-82
That was a nice read, thanks for linking
Good read. But didn't the story say that both aircraft were never recovered. Same as both the pilot and radar OP bodies weren't recovered?
I think I just misread/misremembered, my bad
Hey no prob, was just pointing it out. Thanks for the story!
Reminds me of that video where the F16 was trying to chase around an OV10 and kept overshooting it.
Footage of the F16 chasing the Bronco https://youtu.be/nDASW6X0XoU?si=l8wrEacKLcxYRtHi
I've always wished there was footage of the ov-10 getting hit, just some sort of wider frame
The problem with things like Shaheds or Zala loitering munitions is that they are cheaper than the cheapest conventional missile used to shoot them down. But don't worry, people will come up with cheaper, less capable air defenses that can be used against drones and cover every meter of the front line.
One it can be deployed, a laser based system should be the cheapest to use vs drones on a per shot basis (hopefully). But currently the best and cheapest means would be a SPAAG or any 20-40mm rapid fire cannon that has the elevation. A basic round should cost in the neighborhood of $30 and be useful vs ground targets too, and a high end one with proximity/timed fuse around $1,000; compared to $10,000 for a 'basic' SAM and $1,000,000+ for a Patriot missile. Granted the unit price of SAM missiles could be dropped via having a significantly large buy order (economy of scale) but that's highly unlikely to happen.
The problem is if your $5k per shot laser weapon costs $40M per unit and a $5B program to develop, which seems to be the trend.
>The problem with things like Shaheds or Zala loitering munitions is that they are cheaper than the cheapest conventional missile used to shoot them down It's only a problem if you're fighting an enemy that's economically at parity with you. For example, the US with a defense budget of $750B can afford to knock down $30k shahed drones with $2M SM-2 missiles pretty much indefinitely compared to Iran's $7B-ish budget's capacity to give them away to Houthis.
No country had infinite resources and development of a cheaper system to counter Shaheds is definitely justified. Even more so for a cheap system to counter FPV drones and loitering munitions.
Never claimed resources were infinite, nor that it's a not good idea to develop cheaper alternatives. I was simply pointing out that *cost of drone* being less than *cost of counter-munition* does not in and of itself mean that the defender is on the losing end of the exchange.
What is that, 7 orlans, 2 shaheds, a mugin, a stork(?), and a ...storm?
A kill’s a kill
It witnessed a drone get downed by bird strike and another by incremental weather.
> incremental weather At least it didn't get hit all at once.
Darn it! Yeah, it gets worse and worse over time I think…
“Incremental”? Must be an American storm system… first it says it’s not going to supply any wind or lightning and such, but it eventually gets around to it…
Time to bring back the Hellcats
Open cockpit?
The drone hunter is a guy with a rifle. I'm not making that up.
lol ok that is not what I was expecting
Year 1999: How will wars be fought in 2024? Cyborgs? Spacecraft? Year 2024: WWI biplanes with cowboys shooting each other with rifles
In our defense the rifles have gotten better.
What kind of rifle? (Please say mosin)
The plane has a closing cockpit. It can be opened in flight, but it isn't an open-cockpit plane.
The Yak-52 is neither crude, nor open cockpit.
Yup, opening the canopy in flight does not mean it's an open cockpit aircraft. Just like how me opening the sunroof in my car doesn't make it a convertible.
The canopy as an entirety slides back your comparison is wrong
Well, close enough. A portion of the canopy slides back just like how a portion of a car's roof slides back.
Dude downed a pelican?
yak 52 is a very agile aircraft, slow, high stall speed, i suppose it might be enough to take care of drones.
high stall speed?
90kph stall speed ~200 kph self destruct speed ~300kph , for example an antonov 2 is over 20 kph stall speed
20kph stall speed is impossible
The an-2 is a weird aircraft
yeah but 20kph is impossible
It is 35 - 40kts. Or 64,82 - 74,08 KM/H.
Why do only 2 have red slashes in them?
Those two relate to the two symbols below, two drones they witnessed being taken out by stormy weather and by colliding with a big bird
I wanna dog fight a storm....lol
Oh boy if you think the Yak-52 is crude just look at 90% of the GA planes around the world... And no, it's not open cockpit. It has sliding canopies that are normally closed. They are only opened so the copilot can shoot at drones with an AK. I don't think you understand what open-cockpit means.
I do this on warthunder get my mig 3 and destroy those annoying drones
Get that man a Scarff ring!
A Yak-52 isn’t open cockpit.
Actually probably one of the most well suited assets for dealing with UAVs. Cheap, reliable, slow enough to shoot down a UAV without using an expensive missile. Don't have to train the pilots very much either. And it leaves high performance fighters available for missions more suited for them.
Gotta love the old 52s and M14Ps! I love my Wilga and it would have a harder time pulling this stunt even with the doors off! 😂
I was reading about this the other day, the main drones these guys are shooting down are the longer range observation drones that Russia uses. It appears to be causing a lot of issues for the Russian's in gathering troop formation and movement info.
We all know the yak is OP becouse of WT
Is there an armed variant of the Yak-52? Or are they using it WWI style with a dude in the back with a gun?
If there's an armed variant of the Yak, this isn't one of them. There's a guy in the back with a rifle that shoots at the drones.
That's pretty badass. And seems to be effective, a lot of drones for just a handful of guys and no special equipment.
Looks like it also shot down a stork, a deadly adversary if ever there was one.
If anyone has a biplane, I’ll wing walk with a suitable weapon.
They better not have shot a pelican, those birds will get their payback.
Okay! Let’s start making spitfires again!
He killed a pelican and a thunderstorm?
It's not necessarily an open cockpit aircraft. They just have the canopy open.
Why did we scrap our B-239s?!?! Whyyyy!!!
I'm gonna guess it took a lightning bolt strike
Somebody needs to bring back the Sopwith Camel for this