International Military Discussion

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 May 2014 20:49

Pavel Podvig March 27, 2014 ( Webinar )

“Modernization of the Russian Strategic Forces”

https://s3.amazonaws.com/ucs-webinars/S ... 5-8-14.mp4

BIO:Pavel Podvig is an independent analyst based in Geneva, where he runs his research project, "Russian Nuclear Forces". He is also a Senior Research Fellow at the UN Institute for Disarmament Research and a member of the International Panel on Fissile Materials.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 May 2014 20:50

"Fast and Furious: Analyzing Hypersonic Boost-glide Weapon Test Flights”
James Acton March 27, 2014

https://s3.amazonaws.com/ucs-webinars/S ... -27-14.mp4

ABSTRACT: There is currently a resurgence of interest in hypersonic boost-glide weapons. The United States has been developing them for a decade under the Conventional Prompt Global Strike program and conducted its first successful test in 2011. China conducted its first test in January 2014 and there is evidence that Russia is also pursuing them. These programs are already complicating arms control efforts and, if fielded, boost-glide weapons could have profound implications, both positive and negative, for international security. Understanding these weapons and their effects therefore presents an important challenge. To this end, I present a simple mathematical model of the boost-glide trajectory. I use it to analyze the tests flights from one prototype U.S. system (the Hypersonic Technology Vehicle-2) to infer certain characteristics of the glider, including its lift-to-drag ratio. This analysis highlights the technical challenges confronting the development of boost-glide weapons and their potential military weaknesses.

BIO:James M. Acton is a senior associate in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment. He has a PhD in theoretical physics from Oxford University. He specializes in deterrence, disarmament, nonproliferation, and nuclear energy. His current research focuses on the implications of next-generation conventional weapons for both the nuclear disarmament process and international security more broadly.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 May 2014 14:11

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/m ... ptured-spy
Iran claims copy of captured US drone will soon take test flight

• Officer says on state TV: 'We have broken its secrets'
• White House blamed 2011 loss on technical problem

Iran said on Sunday it had succeeded in copying a US drone it captured in December 2011. State television broadcast images apparently showing the replicated aircraft.

Iran captured the US RQ-170 Sentinel while it was in its airspace, apparently on a mission to spy on the country's nuclear sites, US media reported.

At the time, the White House blamed the loss on a technical problem causing a loss of control. Iran claimed to have brought the drone down by electronically disrupting its GPS system.

US military officials tried to play the incident down, saying Iran did not have the technology to decipher the drone's secrets, and President Barack Obama asked the Islamic republic to return the Sentinel.

Joe Lieberman, then chairman of the Senate homeland security committee, said: "It was not good for the US when the drone went down in Iran, and not good when the Iranians grabbed it. [But] I don't have confidence at this point that they are really able to make a copy of it."

“It's a very sophisticated piece of machinery and has served our national security well, including, I would guess, being used to look all over Iran, particularly at areas where we have reason to believe that they are working on a nuclear weapon."

In the footage broadcast on Sunday, an officer said: "Our engineers succeeded in breaking the drone's secrets and copying them. It will soon take a test flight.”

Iran has been working to develop a drone programme. Some of its unmanned aircraft have a range of hundreds of miles and are armed with missiles.

The state broadcaster also showed images that the commentary said had been recorded by an Iranian drone above a US aircraft carrier in the Gulf. In the pictures, which were relatively clear, it was possible to see American personnel working on planes and helicopters aboard the vessel.

The broadcast showed supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's visit to an exhibition organised by the Revolutionary Guards air wing about Iran's military advances, particularly regarding ballistic missiles and drones. Footage showed two nearly identical craft.

"This drone is very important for reconnaissance missions," Khamenei said, standing in front of the Iranian copy of the American aircraft.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 May 2014 07:54

No more US GPS stations in Russia from June 1 - Russian vice premier

Russia will suspend the work carrid out by US GPS stations sited within its borders if no agreement is reached to set up GLONASS ground stations in the US, said Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin to the press.

"We are suspending the work of these stations on Russian territory starting from June 1," he said as reported by Interfax. Rogozin said that American stations were deployed in Russia in line with agreements signed in 1993 and 2011.

"In accordance with these agreements, eleven GPS stations are located in ten Russian regions," he said.

Rogozin also announced that Russia and the United States have until May 31 to negotiate the deployment of Russian GLONASS stations in the United States. "A working group has been formed, which comprises representatives of the federal space agency Roscosmos, the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Foreign Ministry. We are starting talks with the United States and we reserve three months, until the end of summer, to complete them. We hope solutions will be found that will help restore proportional cooperation. If no solutions are found the work of these stations will finally be stopped on September 1," Rogozin noted.

Additionally, Rogozin made the point on Tuesday that Russia agrees to sell RD-180 and NK-33 rocket engines to the US but with limitations; "We will assume that, without guarantees, our engines are used only for launching non-military spacecraft, we won't be able to deliver them to the US," Rogozin said.

RD-180 engines manufactured by Energomash and NK-33 by a Samara-based company have been delivered to the US in line with inter-governmental agreements, and the US has used them to launch various types of spacecraft until recently he said.

Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) chief Oleg Ostapenko said Russia is willing to manufacture those engines and sell them to the US on condition that they are not used for military launches.

The suspension of the operation of the GPS ground stations in Russia will not affect civil aviation flights, a source in one Russian airline companies told Interfax.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 14 May 2014 12:31

Since some of you jingos want to continue testing nukes, hereis a story of a wacky US nuke test.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/3c3c42e3c040

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 May 2014 20:10

Some good pics of Iran SAM Development , PGM and other stuff

Exhibition of Achievements of the IRGC Aerospace Force of Iran

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/848290.html

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 May 2014 04:57

Russia plans to leave International Space Station by 2020, official says

A chance for India to contribute?

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 15 May 2014 14:17

china will do everything to stop

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 May 2014 19:33

Pacifism threatened? Japan's Abe due to announce plan to loosen military limits

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 May 2014 02:04

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/n ... p-GPS.html

MoD creates 'coldest object in the universe' to trump GPS
A huge UK research effort is creating navigation technology thousands of times more accurate than GPS and completely immune to jammers and hackers - with future applications including nuclear submarines and your next smartphone

The MoD is pouring millions of pounds into research on a “quantum compass” that will be far more accurate than GPS and immune to jammers or hackers, with potential applications in everything from nuclear submarines to your next smartphone.

Quantum technology is already being explored in universities and companies worldwide for potential applications in communications and computation, but several UK academic projects backed by cash from the MoD are focusing on how it can be used in sensing and precision timing - both of which could lead to a “game-changing” navigation device. It could also give birth to the most precise clock ever created.

The whole field hinges upon an unusual field of physics called quantum mechanics which explores how particles on a sub-atomic level can act as both a physical particle and an electromagnetic wave at the same time.

Quantum TNS (timing, navigation and sensing) involves cooling atoms down to temperatures a billion times colder than outer space. Unlike GPS, which relies on triangulation from a network of satellites, it very accurately measures movements from a known position to keep track of location.

With the first products expected in the next five years, its potential impact on the electronics, defence and telecommunications could be huge.

Currently submarines use GPS while surfaced but rely on crude accelerometers when underwater to track position with dead reckoning. But spending just one day underwater can lead to inaccuracy of up to a kilometre. With quantum TNS this error could be kept to as little as one metre.

To highlight the potential in this new area of technology a conference is taking place today at the National Physical Laboratory in Teddington to showcase 13 new research projects being funded by DSTL to bring the technology to market.

Neil Stansfield, who is tasked with exploring “emerging and disruptive technologies” at the MoD’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, said that defence may be an early adopter of quantum TNS but that the civil market is “potentially enormous” and could see the technology built-in to cars and phones.

“We’ve done quite a lot of looking at the physics, and most of the basics are either proven or we know what needs to be done to prove it. The uncertainty is not ‘can we do it’, but ‘how long will it take’,” he said. “We’re at the beginning of a journey here.

“The size of the equipment we’re building is, if you imagine a shoebox that stretched out to about a metre long. That’s in one axis, so you’d need three of those to do 3D.”

When the first atomic clock was developed at the NPL it was the size of a room, now they are the size of a suitcase. It is hoped that navigation devices using quantum mechanics will follow the same rate of miniaturisation.

The idea is based on a Nobel Prize-winning theory which showed atoms could be frozen with a laser. In the navigation systems now being developed at the DSTL a vacuum container with between one and ten million atoms, all moving at around the speed of a jet aircraft, is hit by lasers and cooled to temperatures a billion times colder than outer space. These atoms at that point become coldest known bodies in the universe.

The atoms are slowed until they are moving at just a few millimetres a second. They can then be unfrozen for precise lengths of time to take exact measurements of how far they moved, therefore allowing precise calculations on how the whole device moved in that time or changes in gravitation. One problem yet to be overcome is that these two possibilities cannot be told apart – a large object to the north of the sensor would give the same reading as acceleration to the south. It is thought that maps showing high-gravitation areas will be able to solve this issue.

The speed with which this quantum TNS is adopted in commercial products is hard to predict, said Stansfield, and largely dependent on consumer demand. But the National Physical Laboratory’s Bob Cockshott said that there was definite potential.

“Maybe six or eight years ago the idea of every phone having GPS in it was ludicrous, now the chipset costs a couple of dollars. I think we'll see the same sort of trajectory here. Perhaps in a number of years these devices could be built-in to all devices,” he said. “The really pressing need now is for something that works when you can’t see the satellite. GPS is never going to tell you what floor of the car park you’re on.”

Cheap and compact laser technology has been developed by the telecoms industry, so much of the building blocks for these quantum TNS devices is ready to go, he said. And there will be applications long before it is minituarised to the extent needed to fit into smartphones: “That metre-long shoebox won’t fit in your pocket, but it certainly will fit in a modest-sized aircraft.”

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 May 2014 02:07

Russia halts rocket exports to US, hitting space and military programmes
Russia announces decision to halt export of crucial rocket engines in response to US sanctions over annexation of Crimea
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014 ... -sanctions

tuart Clark
The Guardian, Thursday 15 May 2014 17.57 BST
Moscow has signalled the end of its International Space Station collaboration with the US, saying it wants to fund 'more promising space projects'. Photograph: Nasa/Getty Images

Russia's deputy prime minister, Dmitry Rogozin, has announced it will halt the export of rocket engines crucial to the US military defence and space programmes.

The move marks a serious deterioration in US-Russian cooperation in space, which for two decades had remained largely above Earthly politics. It could prove a serious set back for the ailing US space programme.

The Russian RD-180 engine has been in production since 1999. The US has imported more than forty of them to power its Atlas V rockets into space.

Designed to be expendable, the RD-180s are not recovered and refurbished after use, so a constant supply is needed to keep up with the US launch manifest.

Although Nasa relies on the Atlas V to launch some of its deep space probes, such as the Curiosity rover currently operating on Mars, most are used to put AmericanUS spy satellites and other classified payloads into space.

Under the new restrictions, it is only rockets for military rather than civilian launches that would be disallowed. But in practice it will make it difficult for the US to import any of the engines because it will hard to prove the hardware is not destined for a military programme.

Russian's move is the latest step in an escalating series of sanctions affecting space co-operation brought about by the Russian annexation of Crimea.

On 3 April, Nasa announced it was suspending its partnership with Russia over all space activities apart from the International Space Station (ISS).

It was a risky move because the US lost the ability to launch its own astronauts with the abandonment of the space shuttle programme in 2011.

Private companies are now developing replacement capsules but flights carrying astronauts will not happen until December 2015.

Until then, the US has no choice but to rely on the Russians.

Now Moscow has signalled the end of the ISS collaboration, too. Russian news agency Interfax reported on Tuesday that Moscow would not extend its collaboration on the ISS beyond 2020.

The countries have been working together on the ISS since 1993, following the collapse of the Soviet Union. "After 2020, we would like to divert these funds [used for ISS] to more promising space projects," said Rogozin. These could include collaborations with the Chinese on other space stations or even moon bases.

While the space station is the most visible sign of the superpowers' collaboration, it is the loss of the RD-180 engines that will really hurt, according to space commentator Brian Harvey, who has reported on the Russian space programme since the 1970s.

"For the Americans not to take RD-180s any more would probably be quite disruptive of their space programme in the medium-term," he says. This is because of the time it would take to develop a replacement.

"Most people don't realise just how advanced and powerful Russian rocket engines are," says Harvey.

He estimates that it would probably take five years for the US to build up the necessary technologies and manufacturing expertise to replace the engines. But it does open another opportunity for private companies including PayPal founder Elon Musk's Space X which is developing the Dragon Capsule to ferry people and cargo to the ISS.

On 30 April, Space X filed a protest with the US court of federal claims over bulk-buying of the Russian rockets. A temporary ban on importing the RD-180s was ordered because the company responsible for their manufacture, NPO Energomash, was said to be under the control of Rogozin, who is on the US sanction list over Ukraine.

Following an appeal by the US State, Treasury and Commerce departments, the US federal court dissolved the ban but now Rogozin has announced his own prohibition, the US may be forced to develop a replacement engine after all.

In the meantime the US must rely on already bought RD-180s and stocks are dwindling. The US was expecting the delivery of another five this November but the restriction places these in doubt.

"With a bit of sense, the present episode in Ukraine will be over before that happens," says Harvey.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 May 2014 18:10

Report: Russian space rocket breaks apart after launch

Nine minutes after the Proton-M rocket lifted off in Baikonur, Kazakhstan, on Friday, officials on the ground lost contact with the it, ITAR-Tass reported, citing an official from Russia's Federal Space Agency.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 May 2014 11:54

The 4x4 Ural Typhoon on parade:

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9316/568 ... 4_XXXL.jpg
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9800/568 ... 1_XXXL.jpg
http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/15/11/39/27/0_82ea10.jpg
http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/15/11/39/27/0_82eb10.jpg

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 May 2014 18:12

US Army's Air-Conditioned Helmet to Help Soldiers Keep Cool

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 May 2014 16:28

Topol-E launched from Kapustin Yar

On May 20, 2014 the Strategic Rocket Forces carried out a successful launch of a Topol/SS-25 missile that was used to test "new combat payload for future ICBMs." The missile was launched at 21:08 MSK (17:08 UTC) from the Kapustin Yar test site toward the Sary Shagan test site in Kazakhstan.

The Kapustin Yar-Sary Shagan Topol launches has been conducted quite frequently recently. The most recent launch of this type took place in March 2014. Today's launch is most likely one of the two launches that, according to Kazakhstan, Russia was planning to conduct in March. Kazakhstan's ministry of defense identified the missiles used in these launches as Topol-E (Тополь-Э).

UPDATE: The missile left a nice trail in the sky. Also, the video of the launch shows the large warhead section characteristic for Topol-E launches from Kapustin Yar.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2014 23:31

Pictures: Integrated Safety & Security Exhibition 2014

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 23 May 2014 10:58

USN and USAF to integrate NIFC-CA with other networks

Navy, Air Force Team Up in Asia-Pacific Region

WASHINGTON, May 22, 2014 – The Navy and the Air Force are collaborating as part of the Defense Department’s rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert said here yesterday.
The Naval Integrated Fire Control–Counter Air Capability-Based System, which employs the teaming of services’ situational awareness and strike capabilities to detect and attack targets at long range, is prominent in organizing concepts that the Navy and Air Force are using to conduct counter-air operations now and into the future, Greenert said in remarks at the Defense Working Group breakfast.
“We are taking elements of Navy Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air and integrating them into exercises we run with the Air Force [such as] Northern Edge … in Alaska and Valiant Shield [in Guam],” Greenert said. “The whole idea is getting the tactical data links and those networks compatible -- the air-sea battle brought this together.”
The admiral explained that the challenge at hand is how to integrate submarines, other vessels and aircraft to bring a common effect.
NIFC-CA, Greenert said, involves assessing the inventory and area denial systems such as platforms, payloads and sensors, as well as analyzing what elements of NIFC-CA to which the Air Force could contribute.
“You lay [the elements] out there and say, ‘That’s nice. Now how do they operate together?’” Greenert said. “You’re using Aegis cruisers and destroyer ships, everybody sees the same thing and therefore they can shoot the weapon based on what you see.”
The key, Greenert explained, is to sort through the tactical nets -- such as the Air Force’s F-35A aircraft, the Navy’s F-35C and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft, and the Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System -- so the two services can share information.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 May 2014 11:21

Russia plans to develop hypersonic missile by 2020

ASTANA, May 23. /ITAR-TASS/. The Tactical Missiles Corporation plans to develop the first model of a hypersonic missile by 2020, the corporation's director-general Boris Obnosov said at the Kadex 2014 exhibition of weapons and military equipment in Astana, Kazakhstan.

Russia had completed developing a program to create hypersonic missile technologies. The Defense Ministry and the Ministry of Industry and Trade had already approved the program, Obnosov said.

Twelve working groups were formed with the participation of dozens of institutes and companies. The program was already developed and approved. The main thing was to implement it, he said.

The United States and leading companies in other countries are intensively working on such a missile. India, China and France also try to develop in this direction, he noted. "If we are weak here, if we are behind, it will be hard to catch up with them later. Purposeful, systematic and everyday work is needed," the director-general noted.

"If somebody thinks that tomorrow we will pull a hypersonic missile from a pocket, he is mistaken, since the process requires serious scientific and technical developments, serious tests, personnel training and many other things," Obnosov said.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 25 May 2014 08:26

Boeing wins contract to Design DARPA airborne Satellite launch vehicle

What Boeing vehicle would hitch a ride on an F-15E, drop from the aircraft, fire its engines and deploy microsatellites into space?
It’s a new satellite launch vehicle concept designed by Phantom Works Advanced Space Exploration for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) called the Airborne Launch Assist Space Access or ALASA.
Under an 11-month, $30.6-million contract with options to build up to 12 of the 24-foot vehicles, Boeing and DARPA intend to test the ability to cut the cost of routinely launching microsatellites into orbit by 66 percent. According to DARPA, ALASA aims to develop and employ radical advances in launch systems, leading to more affordable and responsive space access compared to current military and U.S. commercial launch operations.
Rockets today are designed using a number of stages, each with its own engine and fuel tanks. The first stage is at the bottom and is usually the largest, the second and subsequent upper stages are above it, and normally decrease in size.Boeing’s design takes the concept one step further and shifts traditional thinking when it comes to today’s launch vehicles.
“As these stages are jettisoned (or dropped), the fuel tank and engines are just thrown away. We developed a cost-effective design by moving the engines forward on the launch vehicle. With our design, the first and second stages are powered by the same engines, reducing weight and complexity,” explained Steve Johnston, director, Advanced Space Exploration.
The 24-foot (7.3-meter) ALASA vehicle is designed to attach under an F-15E aircraft. Once the airplane reaches approximately 40,000 feet, it would release the ALASA vehicle. The vehicle would then fire its four main engines and launch into low-Earth orbit to deploy one or more microsatellites weighing up to a total of 100 pounds (45 kilograms).

sooraj · Post by **sooraj** » 27 May 2014 20:45

China Tests Mealworm Diet For Astronauts
http://themittani.com/news/china-tests- ... astronauts

China's first self-contained biosphere, Moon Palace One, has completed its inaugural experiment: whether three Chinese volunteers could comfortably subsist eating mealworms as their main source of protein, the South China Morning Post reports. The volunteers were sealed inside the test laboratory in Beijing for 105 days to test whether astronauts could use the worms as a primary source of protein, as part of China's plan to launch an orbital space station by 2023.

The biosphere laboratory, the first of its kind in China and third worldwide, is located on the Beihang University campus of the Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Three volunteers from the BUAA, Xie Beizhen, Dong Chen, and Wang Minjuan, were sealed inside to test the diet. The researchers ate mostly self-cultivated produce and grains, and supplemented this diet with mealworms for protein. According to Hu Dawei, a researcher on the project, the idea to use mealworms came from the United Nations. "The United Nations has recommended mealworms for starving people in poor areas such as Africa, so we thought, 'why can't they be used by astronauts in space?'" The volunteer subjects were reportedly "healthy and happy throughout the experiment" on the mealworm diet, despite the fact that "none of them had ever tried them as food before." Wang Minjuan, for her part, commented that while she grew accustomed to the diet, she was craving roasted fish and hotpot.

Moon Palace 1 (Yuegong 1) is 500 cubic meters in volume, and is split into a cabin and two plant cultivation labs. It's a self-sustaining biosphere: the labs process waste and carbon dioxide to produce food for the scientists living inside, and wastewater is purified for reuse in drinking and irrigation. The two plant cultivation rooms are split to allow for different levels of heat and humidity. While this experiment was not completely self-containied - the volunteers supplemented their diets with pre-stored food for nutritional reasons - the researchers hope to add a third cultivation lab to accomodate a fourth researcher and move to a completely self-sustaining model. Liu Hong, the designer of the system, said in an interview with the Beijing News that one of the main concerns was whether the plants could produce enough oxygen for the voulnteers inside, but that turned out not to be a problem.

This biosphere is part of China's long-term plan to construct a lunar base. Most recently, China has successfully launched a manned docking mission with their Tiangong-1 space lab prototype last June, and landed their unmanned Chang'e-3 lunar probe on the moon to launch the Jade Rabbit (Yutu) exploration rover. China's plans for the future include a Chang'e 5 mission by 2017 to send a probe to the moon to return samples to the Earth, and an orbital manned space station by 2023.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 29 May 2014 08:37

Terra Max UGV

Oshkosh’s RoboTruck Vs. IEDs

Video: http://vimeo.com/94997772

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 29 May 2014 10:05

Train carrying military vehicles plows through semi-truck on California’s Highway 99 (EXPLICIT)

http://blog.sfgate.com/stew/2014/05/26/ ... -explicit/

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Jun 2014 09:46

Russia’s promising ICBM can overcome any missile defence

A promising heavy, liquid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) which is being developed in Russia is a unique weapon that can overcome any missile defence, Deputy Defence Minister Yuri Borisov said on Saturday.

“This heavy missile is actually a unique weapon that the United States does not have,” he said live on radio station Russian News Service.

“As for its payload capacity it can carry such anti-missile defence weapons and can have such a large energy reserve that it can fly over the North Pole and over the South Pole,” the deputy defence minister added.

In his words, this military development will be equipped with “highly manoeuvrable warheads.” “This is a very serious weapon and they are seriously afraid of it,” Borisov stated.

“Developments which Russian military enterprises are producing are not inferior in their characteristics [to foreign weapons]. Today we do not seek to contract projects that cede to foreign models, it is senseless,” the deputy defence minister stated.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Jun 2014 09:50

Russia prepares response to American 'prompt global strike' initiative - Defense Ministry

Works aimed at neutralization of the American "Prompt Global Strike " strategy are under way in Russia, Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov said."A number of scientific research works as well as experimental and design works is under way in the context of possible threats related to launching works on global attack with the use of hypersonic technologies on the part of the United States," said Borisov.

"The supply of the "Yars" and "Bulava" missiles is in high gear, the works on a heavy missile are in full swing," Borisov noted. According to the Deputy Minister, the creation of a new heavy intercontinental ballistic missile is also in strict accordance with the schedule.

"The work is proceeding according to the plan," he stated.

The American military initiative "Prompt Global Strike" involves creation of offensive weapon systems that are able to deliver a blow with non-nuclear weapons at any point of the planet within an hour after the decision.It is assumed that deeply modified intercontinental ballistic missiles, hypersonic cruise missiles and weapons based on new physical principles will be the main components of the initiative.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 02 Jun 2014 05:00

Austin wrote:Russia plans to develop hypersonic missile by 2020
ASTANA, May 23. /ITAR-TASS/. The Tactical Missiles Corporation plans to develop the first model of a hypersonic missile by 2020, the corporation's director-general Boris Obnosov said at the Kadex 2014 exhibition of weapons and military equipment in Astana, Kazakhstan.

Russia had completed developing a program to create hypersonic missile technologies. The Defense Ministry and the Ministry of Industry and Trade had already approved the program, Obnosov said.

Twelve working groups were formed with the participation of dozens of institutes and companies. The program was already developed and approved. The main thing was to implement it, he said.

The United States and leading companies in other countries are intensively working on such a missile. India, China and France also try to develop in this direction, he noted. "If we are weak here, if we are behind, it will be hard to catch up with them later. Purposeful, systematic and everyday work is needed," the director-general noted.

"If somebody thinks that tomorrow we will pull a hypersonic missile from a pocket, he is mistaken, since the process requires serious scientific and technical developments, serious tests, personnel training and many other things," Obnosov said.

I thought we were jointly developing the BrahMos-2. This sounds like a competing program. Business as usual?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 02 Jun 2014 18:52

Abe To Put Forward Japan as Counterweight to China

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Jun 2014 22:43

Viv S wrote:I thought we were jointly developing the BrahMos-2. This sounds like a competing program. Business as usual?

Different design bureau ,different missile and different applications

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 02 Jun 2014 23:09

My guess - India's hypersonic missile will be short range while Russian are thinking something with worldwide reach.

But as usual, they will piggyback on the Brahmos-2 research. The Bear is cunning otherwise would have been enslaved a long time back.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 04 Jun 2014 17:15

Fort Hood Sergeant Accused Of Setting Up Prostitution Ring With Cash-Strapped Female Soldiers

Anu Bhagwati, executive director of Service Women’s Action Network and a former captain with the Marine Corps, said prostitution rings are not uncommon within the military and the allegations against McQueen were no surprise.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 04 Jun 2014 17:51

Speed Kills: The Case For Hypersonic Weapons

WASHINGTON: “I believe, today, we could build a Mach 5 cruise missile [with] off-the-shelf materials,” said Charles Brink of the Air Force Research Laboratory. “We could go 500 nautical miles in 10 minutes.”

Brink should know: He ran AFRL’s record-breaking X-51 program. Now AFRL and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) are co-funding a pair of follow-on projects: one for a hypersonic jet like the X-51, aspiring for Mach 8, and another for a different high-speed technology called “boost-glide.” Brink told a recent meeting of the Royal Aeronautical Society’s DC chapter that “those will probably both fly in 2018-2020.” The US Army also has a hypersonics program, and China is testing hypersonic missiles of its own.

Why bother? Ballistic missiles have been going at comparable speeds since Werner von Braun invented the V-2 some 70 years ago. The difference is that V-2s, Scuds, Minutemen, and so on follow a ballistic arc up out through space, while hypersonic systems like the X-51 fly at five or more times the speed of sound in the atmosphere.

Skeptics argue that pushing through all that air resistance just makes the engineering problem needlessly difficult. Believers like Brink and Breaking Defense contributor Robbin Laird argue hypersonics makes a major military difference. The value isn’t speed alone, they say, but a combination of speed, flexibility, and surprise.

First of all, a hypersonic cruise missile would be much smaller then a ballistic missile. Hypersonic engines, like other jet engines, are “air-breathing,” meaning they burn their fuel by mixing it with oxygen from the atmosphere. Ballistic missiles and satellites launch on rocket boosters that must carry their own oxidizer with them. On the recently retired Space Shuttle, for example, the largest tank was mostly carrying oxygen. Smaller missiles can launch from a wider variety of smaller platforms — ships, ground vehicles, even aircraft — giving US commanders more options and the enemy more potential threats to track.

Second, a ballistic missile launch is so bright and hot that you can see it from space: The US has an entire network of satellites to do just that. Once that booster cuts off, the warhead and its “reentry vehicle” coast, cold and dark, against the background of space, but they can’t change course: They’re stuck following a ballistic curve (hence “ballistic missile”) which is so predictable that Sir Isaac Newton could calculate where the target has to be. The X-51 also requires a rocket boost, but a much smaller one, enough to reach Mach 4.8 rather than to exit the atmosphere. Then, once the X-51′s scramjet engine kicks in, it burns much less intensely but continuously, providing thrust throughout the flight. So a hypersonic missile would much less detectable and much more maneuverable than a ballistic one.

As a result, said Laird, a hypersonic missile could have “a very complicated launch trajectory which goes very fast into the target, which basically makes it unstoppable.”

“The faster you fly, the more difficulty [enemy systems] have in tracking you, in hitting you,” Brink told me after his public remarks. Even if long-range early warning radars see you coming — which is far from certain, since hypersonics require such a highly streamlined design even the X-51 demonstrator was “inherently somewhat stealthy,” he said — the enemy has much less time to analyze the data, confirm you’re a threat, and transfer the targeting data to short-ranged but higher-precision radars used by interceptor aircraft and anti-aircraft missiles.

“The handoff between those systems and the update of those systems are made much more complex if you’re coming at them at Mach 5 rather than Mach 0.8,” Brinks said. While a Mach 5 hypersonic missile covers 500 nautical miles in 10 minutes, he said, “right now, a conventional cruise missile would take 45 minutes to an hour.”

In the vastness of the Asia-Pacific theater, however, 500 miles is relatively short-ranged: Even a Mach 5 missile would take almost an hour to get from, for example, the US bases on Okinawa to the Chinese space facilities in Xinjiang.

“Mach 5 doesn’t buy you anything,” said Robert Stein, a member of the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board. “If you really want to get up into a regime where its really helping, double that number. Now you’re starting to talk” — and really starting to get into some difficult engineering. “There are niche roles [for hypersonics],” he told me after a recent missile defense conference, “and one can argue whether the niches are really worth the difficulty.”

“There’s nothing magic about Mach 5,” Brink himself told me. “Why not four or seven? We are all looking at all of those,” he said. The Air Force is studying high-speed turbines going Mach 2.5, ramjets going Mach 3 to 4, and boost-glide systems reaching Mach 8 to 10, as well as hypersonic “scramjets” like the X-51.

“There are other capabilities that could get us faster missiles sooner [than hypersonics],” Laird told me. “I think we need to look at missiles across the board.” After committing hundreds of billions to the F-22 and F-35, often called fifth generation jet fighters, he said, “we’re flying fifth generation aircraft with third and fourth generation weapons.” Hypersonics could be one way for the weapons to catch up to the planes that carry them.

“It’s not the Manhattan Project,” Laird said. “I would make a moderate, steady investment” — preferably in partnership with the Australians, who have a hypersonics project of their own — “and see how the technology matures.”

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XV8AfgbGh5M[/youtube]

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 05 Jun 2014 09:27

^^^

The near term strike effort is the High Speed Strike Weapon (HSSW) program. This effort will mature cruise missile technology to address many of those items necessary to realize a missile in the hypersonic speed regime including: modeling and simulation; ramjet/scramjet propulsion; high temperature materials; guidance, navigation, and control; seekers and their required apertures; warhead and subsystems; thermal protection and management; manufacturing technology; and compact energetic booster technologies. The Air Force conducts research and development in all aspects of hypersonic technologies in partnership with NASA, DARPA, and industry/academic sectors. The HSSW program will include two parallel integrated technology demonstration efforts to leverage DARPA’s recent experience in hypersonic technologies that are relevant to reduce risk in key areas. One of the demonstrations will be a tactically-relevant demonstration of an air breathing missile technology that is compatible with Air Force 5th generation platforms including geometric and weight limits for internal B-2 Spirit bomber carriage and external F-35 Lightening II fighter carriage. This demonstration will build on the X-51 success and will include a tactically compliant engine start capability and launch from a relevant altitude.

http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/im ... -08-14.pdf

Lockheed martin's HSSW design

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/produc ... ssw--.html

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 17 Jun 2014 02:24

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/ ... nic-Weapon
Scramjet-DOD-s-New-Screaming-Fast-Hypersonic-Weapon

It's the second time we have shown a scramjet can ignite and give positive acceleration," Alan R. Shaffer, acting assistant secretary of defense for research and engineering, told an industry association last week, according to The Washington Times. "That is a huge deal. That means we are now starting to understand hypersonics. We, the U.S., do not want to be the second country to understand how to have controlled scramjet hypersonics,” he added.
The Army announced this month that it’ll undergo a second test of its hypersonic weaponry in August.“Right now we are on target with the costs,” Lt. Gen. David L. Mann, commander, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, told the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces on March 12. “I do not see any kind of an overrun at this moment. Everything is kind of predicated on what happens after the test.”Spending on the scramjet technology for the B-52 cost about $250 million from 2004 through 2011. Last year the Pentagon estimated that its Advanced Hypersonic Weapon program would cost about $600 million over the next five years.The programs have been more than a decade in the making. The Defense Department first identified the capability as one of its missions in 2003.
The Pentagon says these types of weapons will be ideal for hitting mobile military units or terrorist groups that don’t stay in one place for more than a day at a time. Using existing weaponry would take days to hit those targets, according to the Defense Department, because it would require getting forces into position before launching an attack. And because the delivery systems for hypersonics are capable of delivering conventional weapons instead of nuclear warheads, the missiles offer more precision.Critics of the program point out that because the missiles are very similar to those used for nuclear weapons, adversaries won’t be able to tell the difference, leading some to erroneously suspect they’re coming under nuclear attack. For countries with nuclear capabilities, that could lead to a counter-attack.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 17 Jun 2014 11:41

As the article rightly points out, using a ballistic missile is greatly worrisome given that it can send a lot of false alarms. Then there is also a problem of cost. A 500nm missile that can be carried by the tactical fleet (F-35's , F-18E/F's and F-15E's) as well as the bombe fleet is going to extremely expensive if it utilizes mach 5 or 6 speeds (scramjet). Then it will have limited utility, and the types of targets you can take out using such a weapon would be extremely small (you cannot do SEAD with such missile anyhow). How does the tactical planner plan his weapons store profile knowing that aircrafts armed with such a missile would not use it on many targets. Best to up the range to 1000nm and have a much bigger missile, and leave it for the non-stealthy Bomber types (B-52, B-1). Lower production volume and strategic targets could perhaps justify the expense and the the numbers procured would not need to be as large. Even Subsonic, stealthy long range tactical missiles are not cheap (JASSM, Storm Shadow). The best option may be to have a Mach 3 UAV that takes out pre programmed C2C targets using SDB II's, that would be the most cost effective solution. The UAV needn't be big and complicated, but could be mounted on the B-52 Perhaps its time to dust off the D21

Of the various Skunk Works Mach 3.0 aircraft programs, the least known to reach the operational hardware stage was undoubtedly the D-21 un-manned strategic reconnaissance drone. Developed for and operated by the Central Intelligence Agency and the Air Force under a veil of extreme secrecy not penetrated until long after the program had ceased to exist as a viable national reconnaissance asset, it was uncovered only by accident. During early 1977, aviation enthusiasts unexpectedly found 17 D-21s in storage at Davis Monthan AFB's Military Aircraft Storage and Disposition Center. Their discovery resulted in the first public disclosure concerning the precedent-setting D-21 and the beginning of an ongoing curiosity about its history and operational service life.Code named “Tagboard,” the D-21 was, in fact, an extension of the A-12 program. It was brought to life in response to the US Government's decision to discontinue over flights following the loss of Gary Powers in his U-2 on May 1, 1960. Consequently, in October 1962, Kelly Johnson made the first log entry in what was to become this enigmatic aircraft's long-hidden history: "Over the past several years, we have had a number of discussions on the feasibility of making a drone with the A-12 aircraft. I have steadily maintained that we should not do this, as it is a much too large and complicated machine. On several different occasions, we studied the use of a QF-104 air-launched from the A-12. It became obvious at an early date that the CIA was totally uninterested in this project, [but] others wanted to do it very much."

Regardless, on October 10, 1962, the Skunk Works from the CIA received authorization for a drone study. Johnson noted the event as follows: "We have now configured it to allow the use of plastic blankets overall for the basic structure. In order to avoid the F-104 problem of a high central vertical tail, I put two on the tips and one in the middle. Besides the aerodynamic benefits of this configuration, they will provide the basis for a landing gear during the flight test operation."

Lockheed had extensive background with the ramjet-powered X-7A-1, X-7A-2 and X-7A-3 test vehicle series and a close working relationship with Marquardt, a neighboring company in the San Fernando Valley. Together they determined that a highly modified Marquardt RJ43-MA-11 ramjet engine, formerly used on the retired USAF/Boeing Bomarc IM-99B air defense weapon, could power the unmanned drone.

Coupled with propulsion technology developed by Marquardt, it was not difficult for the team to execute a functional reconnaissance platform in a relatively short period of time. Importantly, the technology base generated by initial flight tests of the A-12 had given the engineering team (under Johnson) considerable confidence in the aerodynamic and low-observable precedent (i.e., reduced RCS) set by the chine delta. This configuration was a given by the time initial design options were studied for the D-21.

http://www.wvi.com/~sr71webmaster/srbowl001.htm

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Jun 2014 08:03

Russian Dnepr rocket lofts record haul of 37 satellites

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 21 Jun 2014 12:34

Revealing new details about Lockheed Martin’s ambitions in hypersonic weapons, Leland says there is an apt comparison between the early days of stealth technology—exemplifed by the Skunk Works-developed Have Blue demonstrators of the late 1970s—and the current state of hypersonic technology. “When we did Have Blue everyone asked, ‘how do we use it? Do we put it on a fighter,a bomber or a boat—or all of those?’” The angular Have Blue prototypes flew between 1977-79, paving the way for the larger, stealthy F-117A production aircraft under the code name Senior Trend. “We’re at the point where we can see the light at the end of the tunnel. We believe an operational hypersonic missile is achievable by 2020,” says Leland. Just like the approach taken with Have Blue, he adds, the Skunk Works wants to prove the concept with a high-speed strike-weapon (HSSW) demonstrator. “The HSSW will show it can be useful, and even though HSSW will not be operational, it will demonstrate if the integrated missile system can be launched from a practical aircraft, at practical altitudes and at practical speeds.”

Following the frst successful X-51A fight in 2010, the Air Force Research Laboratory’s (AFRL) Munitions Directorate set the ball rolling toward a potential HSSW demonstration program by holding an industry day in mid- 2012. Outline requirements called for the “demonstration of a Mach 5-plus (hypersonic) velocity weapon capable of holding fxed and relocatable (time- critical) targets at risk from tactically relevant standoff distances in tactically relevant timelines,” said David Walker, deputy assistant Air Force secretary, speaking earlier this year. The booster-accelerated demonstrator would also include guidance-and control systems to direct the weapon to “representative targets at lethal proximities and simulate detonation of a mock warhead and/or detonate a live warhead,” he adds. Requirements for the strike-missile demonstrator are also expected to include hitting targets up to 600-plus nm away within 10-12 min. and sustained hypersonic cruise at altitudes of 60,000-80,000 ft.

Following the final and most suc- cessful X-51A flight on May 1, which saw the missile travel at Mach 5.1 over 230 mi., AFRL sketched out a road map for follow-on technology devel- opments which could be aligned with an HSSW demonstrator. These include exploring the endothermic capability of fuels like RP1/RP2 and JP10, which are logistically more supportable than the high fash point JP-7 used in X-51A, as well as new cold-start systems and improved engine controls. Other areas relevant to the weapon’s role include an array of new guidance technologies. Walker said these include “technolo- gies that expand upon our current anti- jam GPS navigation capabilities and novel technical approaches to navigation such as optic-feld-fow techniques and multi-sensor fusion.”

Over the past few months, however, the HSSW picture has become more complex. The Defense Advanced Re- search Projects Agency (Darpa) has become involved and, together with AFRL and wider industry partici- pants, plans are being put together for the demonstrator. The fnal status re- mains to be determined however, and for that reason AFRL, Darpa and other key industry players such as Boeing and Aerojet Rocketdyne declined to comment to Aviation Week.

According to Leland, affordability is the key to making HSSW a success where so many other hypersonic attempts have failed. “It is something we’ve been focused on here. We do not want it to be a silver bullet, and we are targeting lowering the cost by an order of magnitude. There is a common misconception that anything hypersonic has got to be large and exotic. If you can get the cost down so that it’s incrementally more than a subsonic missile, we think the user would want to food the battlefield with a large number of them.” In addition to using of-the- shelf boosters, such as the Army Tacti- cal Missile Systems used in the X-51A tests, Lockheed Martin’s approach includes adapting existing avionics, actuators, fuel pumps and subsystems where possible. “That could save a lot of money,” he adds.

“There have been significant advances in the last decade that have not necessarily been fown,” says Leland, who emphasizes progress in materi- als technologies as an example. “The long pole in the tent is whether you can synthesize the vehicle so that it is not a silver bullet. If you end up with a large, expensive HSSW, then it is not going to happen. We believe the technology is ready and now it is a case of putting it all together.”

Unlike the wedge-shaped X-51A and its two-dimensional wave-riding inlet, the Skunk Works missile will incorpo- rate an inward turning, or round inlet. The original rectangular inlet concept traces back to the long-abandoned X-30 National Aero-Space Plane, which was designed to operate over a wider Mach range than the narrower range of the HSSW. Although scramjets do not need to be axially symmetric about a centerline because they contain no rotating parts, the rounder shape of an inward-turning inlet reduces radar signature, surface area and cooling re- quirements, as well as making integra- tion easier with weapons bays.
Experience in inward-turning in- lets was gained during development tests of the Air Force/Darpa Falcon Combined-cycle Engine Technology (FaCET) scramjet which would have formed part of the combined turbine, dual-mode ramjet propulsion system for the planned HTV-3X Mach 6 dem- onstrator. Although the unmanned HTV-3X was canceled in 2008, the FaCET was successfully put through freejet tests in 2009 at USAF’s Arnold Engineering Development Center’s hy- personic–capable Aerodynamic and Propulsion Test Unit.

“But ultimately we need to fy. We can’t stay in a wind tunnel forever, and that is why we believe it needs to be affordable—so we can fire 10 or 20, not four or fve, to try and do the experiment,” Leland asserts. Lessons in applying the expendable mindset are being taken from Lockheed’s involvement with such missiles as Rattlrs (Revolutionary Approach To Time Critical Long-Range Strike), and AGM- 158 Jassm (Joint Air-to-Surface Stand- of Missiles). “How do you design even a demonstrator to be very afordable? You don’t want to design a Lamborghini when a Camaro will do.”
The planned target speed for the Skunk Works design is Mach 6. “We found that’s the ‘sweet spot.’ Go much above that you get very costly, very quickly for a missile, and at the same time, performance drops of. If you back of from Mach 6 you slowly start to im- pact survivability,” Leland explains.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Jun 2014 17:59

When Drones Fall From the Sky

More than 400 large U.S. military drones have crashed in major accidents around the world since 2001, .............................

A loss of around 26 per year.

Do people, knowing this, proposing drones, still suggest that they are a viable alternative? Just asking.

(Did not read teh entire article so far, but it would have been nice if teh author had provided out of how many drones - %age failures.)

Any idea how many drones India has lost so far?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 21 Jun 2014 18:14

A lot of the drones were rushed into war while still in testing, that probably contributed to some of the losses. Another aspect I can think of is the forces sending drones out in conditions where there was no manned aircraft that could launch (bad whether, dust storms and what not) for CAS and intel. The cheaper the drones the more liable they are to the various things. If you want reliability at par or better then the manned aircraft you will have to give them proper systems for those missions. That costs money (The Global Hawk and the Triton version).

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Jun 2014 18:16

"Reasons" - from that article:

The Post’s analysis of accident records, however, shows that the military and drone manufacturers have yet to overcome some fundamental safety hurdles:

* A limited ability to detect and avoid trouble. Cameras and high-tech sensors on a drone cannot fully replace a pilot’s eyes and ears and nose in the cockpit. Most remotely controlled planes are not equipped with radar or anti-collision systems designed to prevent midair disasters.

* Pilot error. Despite popular perceptions, flying a drone is much trickier than playing a video game. The Air Force licenses its drone pilots and trains them constantly, but mistakes are still common, particularly during landings. In four cases over a three-year period, Air Force pilots committed errors so egregious that they were investigated for suspected dereliction of duty.

* Persistent mechanical defects. Some common drone models were designed without backup safety features and rushed to war without the benefit of years of testing. Many accidents were triggered by basic electrical malfunctions; others were caused by bad weather. Military personnel blamed some mishaps on inexplicable problems. The crews of two doomed Predators that crashed in 2008 and 2009 told investigators that their respective planes had been “possessed” and plagued by “demons.”

* Unreliable communications links. Drones are dependent on wireless transmissions to relay commands and navigational information, usually via satellite. Those connections can be fragile. Records show that links were disrupted or lost in more than a quarter of the worst crashes

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 21 Jun 2014 18:26

A limited ability to detect and avoid trouble.

Sense and avoid systems are heavy, costly and were not developed by the time these drones were sent to the field to fight. In most cases there is a heavy tradeoff that would be required to be made between that and the payload. In most cases and for a majority of the predator class drones the troops would probably prefer better ISR and payload and take the attrition rate compared to loosing precious payload. These drones are ISR drones that were propped up as UCAV's. Expect newer ones that are UCAV's from the ground up to not have these issues (Avenger, NG reapers, Uclass and whatever comes in the future).

Pilot error. Despite popular perceptions, flying a drone is much trickier than playing a video game

A genuine problem of rapidly introducing capability that is "first of its kind" and rushing it to war.

Persistent mechanical defects. Some common drone models were designed without backup safety features and rushed to war without the benefit of years of testing. Many accidents were triggered by basic electrical malfunctions; others were caused by bad weather. Military personnel blamed some mishaps on inexplicable problems. The crews of two doomed Predators that crashed in 2008 and 2009 told investigators that their respective planes had been “possessed” and plagued by “demons.”

Rather self explanatory. The troops would probably still prefer a "rushed" system that works as opposed to not having a system at all. I have read articles over the years that at one point General Atomics had something like 1/3 of its entire drone engineering team based out of Afghanistan. Solutions were being investigated and designed at the battlefront.

Unreliable communications links. Drones are dependent on wireless transmissions to relay commands and navigational information, usually via satellite. Those connections can be fragile. Records show that links were disrupted or lost in more than a quarter of the worst crashes

Communication networks have also grown exponentially from the start of Afgnahistan to where they are now. Its a very facinating area to study and what has been managed in a short time due to an urgent tactical need would probably take 2x or more during peacetime.

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/armed-ua ... z35HT8R4Za

A loss of around 26 per year.

Do people, knowing this, proposing drones, still suggest that they are a viable alternative? Just asking.

Depends upon the mission. For ISR, The triton can hold on the BAMS mission with an endurance of 24 hours (can be upped to 30 hours with upgrades). Stealthy ISR assets can do the same over huge distances. Manned aircraft would struggle to completely do these missions with the same effectiveness. I don't think the US Navy has even tried to come up with the math on how many P-8 orbits it would take to continuously maintain surveillance over the grid that a single Triton can maintain for 24 hours. Capability would obviously not be superior to the P-8, but endurance and loiter gives you a unique capability that can be built up and enhanced through your computing and data linking structure (already being addressed). For Permissive environment or lightly defended areas the Avenger UCAV would be hard to beat on a cost per pound ordinance basis by any tactical fighter.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabili ... _sheet.pdf

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Jun 2014 18:36

I remember reading during the first Gulf War US had lost significant percentage of Cruise Missile due to Mechinical Failure/Engine failure etc.

Drone failure reason would be some what similar , They are designed to be affordable and hence lack redundant systems like Aircraft do , If you loose communication link or have some kind of mechnical failure even though these could be of minor nature , getting them back would be challenge as there is no pilot in there that can try to save it by his skills and using backup systems.

Drones are also vulnerable to AD even if these are low-moderate types as drones tend to be slow and lot less agile.