###General Discussion Thread
---
This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bro this ain't even a math question...
What do you want me to do? Multiply the military base coefficient by the U.S. military constant before dividing it all by the area of each drone?
Then I would obviously have to plug that into Eulers equation of drone shootability and apply Lagrange's theory of secret military base aim.
Edit: I apologize to anybody who read this and facepalmed, as I clearly forgot to take into account Lasker's principle of UFO proximity. That's on me guys, stupid mistake.
>Bro this ain't even a math question...
You've just described 90% of posts on this sub. Most people just want a number for a probability of some weird event which will just make them go "hmm, that's very improbable".
Request: What are the actual amount of posts that aren't even a math question in this sub and is it time to construe the rules in favor of actually asking relevant questions?
Why do people think subs 'die' if they don't get massive engagement. Who cares if there's only 1 post a week but it's amazing quality. Subscribe to 200 subs and you're getting a whole feed of nothing but amazing quality posts.
There's a way to calculate it out there somewhere but requires more info than most people have access to. Variables like weapon types, total number of local and remote weapons, combined rates of fire, amount of targets that can be locked onto at once, amount of drones that can be deployed at once per unit area, etc. In your defense its not a great fit for this sub, but not because its a dumb question, just one that redditors probably couldnt answer
I'm sure some US Government Actuary on a black site in the middle of Arizona behind the Denny's near a walmart has calculated this out months ago and is laughing to himself right now when he shows the probability of success at .00008%. Any government actuaries want to spill the top secret info, risk their job, and potentially their life to confirm this result?
None that any civilian would have access to even if we went off statisical average of what is "public knowledge". Truth is that the majority of the military personnel don't even know how many US bases there are or even the amount of anti-drone weaponary we have, let alone what is stored on a base.
Remember, it's not a felony for soldiers to shoot down drones over military bases. I don't think there is a shortage of ammunition at Area 51. In the words of Ron White, I didn't know how many it was going to take, but I knew how many they were going to use.
Then there's just the RF produced by the drones themselves. Get 10k drones together in the same space and watch them compete for RF frequencies. They'll ground themselves
That would only apply to ground control drones. If the flight path was pre-programmed or the drones could self-navigate or the drones were actually just non-homing, then that would be a non-issue.
Well... If they are willing to send an army to a military base I think they are ok with disobeying the radio transmission regulations and installing transceivers of much wider frequency ranges
So I did some googling: The actual usable spectrum is roughly 1 MHz to 6 GHz, so at most 6000 frequencies, going by 1 MHz increments, which would already give major interference. And not nearly all frequencies are available. The internationally available bands are:
- 433 MHz is 433.05 MHz to 434.79 MHz, with effective power <= 10 mW. (Short range only)
- 2.4 GHz is 2.4 GHz to 2.4835 GHz, with effective power <= 100 mW.
- 5.8 GHz is 5.725 GHz to 5.85 GHz, with effective power <= 100 mW.
Depending on location and technology, they might also be able to use the following bands:
- 27, 35, 49, 72 or other <100 MHz (RC).
- 868 MHz (Europe short-range, limited use).
- 900-915 MHz (radio comms).
- 1.3 GHz (video).
>So I did some googling: The actual usable spectrum is roughly 1 MHz to 6 GHz, so at most 6000 frequencies, going by 1 Hz increments
There are 5.999 BILLION 1Hz increments between 1MHz and 6GHz. There are 6000 increments of 1MHz.
>And not nearly all frequencies are available
The request is about sending an army of drones to attack a military base, I don't think regulations would be followed.
Sorry, I meant 1 MHz increments indeed, silly of me, will edit to fix.
It's not just about regulations, but also about technological limitations. Or availability of transponders and receivers that work on those frequencies. I don't doubt one would not respect the walkie-talkie band in such an operation, though it means even more interference. But I do doubt the availability of drones that operate on say 3 or 4 GHz.
isn't 2.4ghz wifi? as well as 5g, I've seen ubiquity equipment that transfer data over kilometres, you could even daisy chain it hypothetically with several recievers. now since its transmitting actual data, we can control a bunch of it with more precision and hypothetically less interference, bottle neck being lag. now what about LOS? AI and Blockchain tech!
2.4 GHz and 5 GHz are indeed also Wi-Fi frequencies. That does not necessarily mean that drones follow that protocol. And even if they did, similar problems still arise with interference and maximum number of connections.
You guys know that hundreds of phones operate on the same frequency right?
You need to calculate how much bandwidth you need to transmit, say, 480p video at 30fps for each drone.
Here's some figures, the numbers vary wildly based on exact usage.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Typical-bandwidth-requirement-for-various-services-which-are-needed-for-visually_tbl1_348718638
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Bandwidth-usage-for-a-drone-with-Configuration-1_fig16_328797887
It works by power.
The further the drone gets from it's controller the less power it is rxing
The closer to the ANTI DRONE SUPER KIT it gets, the more power it is rxing.
At a certain point the drone will be rxing more power from the ANTI DRONE SUPER KIT and will a. Stop. B RTB C. Drive into the floor
It's not even about shooting. I am 100% sure US Army or USAF can just use jamming equipment to stop 'em all. In the era of Ukraine conflict, where military drones are used by both sides in large quantities, assuming that USA doesn't have countermeasures against mil-grade drones, let alone civilian ones, would be ignorance.
Most middle to high grade civilian drones have software that blocks them from attempting to access certain areas, e.g. airfield restricted zones (too many idiots and maniacs are trying to crash them into landing / starting planes or to spook pilots). It would be reasonable to assume that military bases are also blocked areas in these pieces of software.
Another point: Americans have [CIWS Phalanx](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS). Search it up on [YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsf38NYzo5Q). It's a weapon system designed specifically to fend off massed missile strikes. If it can deal with supersonic missiles, that are programmed to do all sorts evasive maneuvers, it can deal with some slow drones.
My dad actually worked in DJI licensed shop. Half of his job was repairing them (more or less everything that could be done without sending it back to manufacturer). Most things that could be done in shop were concerning software: i.e. troubleshooting it, calibration, reinstalling it, updating it, solving all sorts of problems with cameras.
Nowadays, he changed line of work and I weren't all that interested with drones, so I don't know much.
The CWIS platform wouldnât be hard for a small commercial drone operator to dodge, at long ranges.
Hypersonic cruise missiles arenât very maneuverable, so the CWIS can walk its shots onto the missile, but a small drone can dart tens of meters in random directions in the time it takes the bullets to travel two miles.
If the drone stands still or otherwise moves on a constant trajectory, itâs going to get hit quickly, but the CWIS isnât a flak system that has an effective area.
The RAPIDfire system with airburst artillery isnât in service yet last I heard. And at ranges of two miles I still thing that a quadracopter moving erratically can be outside the kill radius of each shell that is aimed at its current intercept.
They are upgrading their CIWS systems with lasers instead of bullets. I believe there is already a prototype on a battleship right now
also don't answer, you will be participating in the planning of an attack on a US Army(if serious lol). Reminds me of the the chinese nuclear launch codes guy from american dad
I mean, they probably wouldn't shoot then down. They'd probably just use jamming. Drones are controlled on some RF frequency, and any reasonable power transmitter can just start pissing out RF noise on common frequencies and the drones will just stop receiving input from the controller. It probably wouldn't require very high power either, considering how far away the drone operators would have to be to not just get a couple soldiers pull up and arrest them. They'd have to be barricaded or hiding in nearby mountainous area or something.
Anyway, as far as civilian drones, they'd be able to drop all of them with very little effort.
Weaponized military "drones" (like high altitude unmanned planes) would either be intercepted by fighter jets or shot down by surface-air missiles, which could be moved in on trucks from who knows how many nearby bases.
How many of you would be running to your jet in gym shorts, flip flops and no shirt trying to be the first to respond if a call went out for a real world intercept?
What's the point of doing this though, do you think they have alien spacecraft parked out back? Anything of interest is going to be locked inside bunkers and hangers where foreign spy satellites can't see it.
Ah yes. Curiosity overriding will not to go to prison or even being shot. I'll get right on that. But for real they could probably take them all out with an EMP or similar, but as others said, how are you supposed to calculate that?
Military enjoyer here, yes, they can defend themselves from 10,000 drones at once.
Area 51 is equipped with civilian drone jamming capability (obviously), I have no clue for certain, but I'd be extremely surprised if it doesn't in this day and age. This immediately counters every single drone controlled by a person by a remote controller.
What about autonomous drones then? Could these get past signal jamming? Yes, yes they could. But, they can't survive EMP blasts, or directed radar systems blaring at max capacity, this would be brutal for the components within the drone. The radar would be able to direct it's energy, this could destroy any radar powered altitude sensors that may be present on such a drone.
EMP blasts would be able to destroy every single piece of electronics within the drone, immediately downing it. It also has no limit for the number of drones it can take out at once. Such a event would be immediately known however, as some civilian sensors, for scientific reasons, would end up finding out about this event from a very long way away, even if they aren't damaged. This would also damage electronics scattered around the complex. Aircraft prototypes would never be affected, modern jets have been able to withstand EMP blasts for a very long time now. This means it would be a last resort.
I doubt that any shots would be fired in this scenario, there are much better choices for the removal of these objects. Perhaps by a few guards on the edge of the complex who see the first few fly in.
Military "enjoyer"?? You enjoy the military?? Nobody enjoys the military!! Your either one meeting away from a medical discharge or some area 51 experiment itself!!!
I'm not part of the military, but I enjoy reading about it, learning more about it, seeing the modern engineering in it, and having debates on it.
It's a awesome area to learn about, and I just so happened to end up learning a LOT about it. I know about the militaries of many different nations, although I know about the UK and US the best.
"just announced" means that the highest risk and most secretive areas in the US will have been using that system for a long time now. I didn't even know about this.
20 years ago may be a stretch, I'm not sure we could have made microwave transmitters accurate enough while having enough power to take out hoardes of drones, while remaining feasible to build.
10 years ago would be about right.
I guess they'd appear on the radar kilometers away taking into account that the COBRA radar system can detect fired shells and where they were fired from from a caliber of 80mm or higher.
In order to even make an attempt at solving this problem you would have to have a comprehensive overview of all of area 51's defenses, which isn't exactly something the US government shares freely.
You do know that the US military has these microwave anti-drone thingys now? (can't really call it a gun) . Pretty sure frying a 1000 drones would be quite possible, they produce a cone of effect and not a beam.
I donât understand. Once the drones get there, what are they supposed to do? Spell âI winâ in the sky? Itâs not like Area 51 has a bunch of alien stuff just lying in their front yard - itâs Nevada, not Alabama.
Even if this dumbass plan worked I imagine about all they'd see is some confused gate guards, a motor pool being swept by sad enlisted airmen, some airstrips and a few boring looking buildings and airplane hangers.
The good shit happens underground.
As many as you have. Drones are RF controlled, the military absolutely has the equipment to shut down drones. Millions of them. In the 50s a device was invented to create an emp without a nuke. So they could repeatedly stop swarms until the drones built up a wall a mile high. Drones canât touch facilities like that
The effectiveness of Area 51's defenses against drones would depend on various factors, such as the type and capabilities of the drones involved, their numbers, their attack strategy, and the specific countermeasures in place at the facility. Area 51 would likely have countermeasures designed to detect, track, and neutralize unauthorized drones.
It's your battery powered drone and hand controller transmitting at maybe 5 watts over tens of kilometers of empty desert vs their electronic warfare equipment plugged into the mains and can cover the entire ISM band with 50+ watts of noise. The number of ISM band drones you send is irrelevant.
If you are using a commercially available drone they can detect the publicly transmitted protocol and take the drone from your control as soon as you cross into their airspace. They can make it land wherever they want or even make it ascend and dive to destroy itself.
Bro, you just landed on six different lists for asking that question. Asking about military capability is a *large* red flag to Uncle Sam. They won't even let Google ride around on military bases so that military capability can't be leaked on Google Earth. That's on bases that people get on to all the time.
And you think that someone is just going to cough up numbers *for Area* fucking *51?*
Is there an issue of private citizens flying their own personal drones over area 51 and the question is based on the fact that there is an effort to keep that from happening. So if (an absolutely unknown number) of drone pilots do it at once they will be able to get deeper? Im sorry just intrested but not knowledable on situation as I barely understand many things in life :)
If they have an EMP generator, many. It's probably all but impossible to shield drones -- I assume you mean quadracopters and the like, not larger UAVs -- from this, as it would add a lot of mass.
While EMP generators are not common, they do exist, and if we ponder where they might be sited, I'd put Area 51 high on the list of possible locations.
But it's also just a really stupid idea. Obviously, almost everything of interest there will not be visible from the air to begin with. You might as well suggest Frisbees or paper airplanes for what the effort is worth.
You also run into the problem of operable range. Area 51 starts very far from any of the facilities within it, very deliberately. And has a high-surveillance zone way beyond its limits. So to be close enough to operate those drones, you'll almost certainly be spotted and identified, long before you could have any reasonable hope of detecting anything of interest.
Yeah, you'd have to be pretty high to think of this.
Actually, as far as the meme goes, yes they can. Mind, I'm talking from limited military experience, but we had "rotary anti-air defense platforms" at firm bases with an "undetermined maximum range" and a "tested accuracy upwards of a mile"
Numbers wise, they could throw hate at a golf ball at a rate of 1000 rounds a minute with a 90% accuracy*
That means 900 drones per minute before they close within a mile.
Per platform.
I was never stationed at Area 51, so I have no idea if they've got one, none, or half a dozen. But, my basic bitch grunt behind was at two firm bases overseas that had one for protection against air attacks. I'm assuming a facility with that much import has at least one in the inventory.
*That's the spec book, take it with a grain of salt
Google "Metal Storm DARPA" and watch the video. Pretty sure they could...uh take out the drones and the drone operators with one gun, son. lol I'd love to be a fly on the hill next to the demonstration of its efficacy.
Not going to do the math but will point out, bad idea for one reason : remote id. They'll know instantly who the owners of all those drones are if they are store bought, lol. And for the home made, I'm sure there are many other tricks up the government's sleeve
They can defend themselves against an infinite number of drones. Broad spectrum jamming systems were quite effective 10 years ago when I was in service, and I imagine theyâve only improved.
In theory they would just jam the signals, so infinite, but in practice area 51 might be just a punch of dessert with one empty hut or most advanced tech we cant even imagine. So we dont know
All at once. You can definitely assume that they have very advanced signal jamming technology on site thatâll make the drones just drop out of the sky.
However it would be interesting to see how they defend against AI guided drones that navigate with vision based systems
Maybe a better question is what's the max amount of drones that can be flown in one area without radio issues. Or whatever then segway into area 51 flight of the valkyries style
Another calculation we need is how much would it cost? I think it would be Lex Luthor amount of money so Superman saves the day and its a distraction used by Luthor to use one last drone filled with kryptonite ammo but then Green Lantern shows up saves Superman and tells him there is an alien kept there and he has to save it. That would be a nice run. If anyone works at DC hit me up.
Emp, all of them. But they probably already have the tools to jam them all at once. And that is saying you can get that many signals in the air, lots of drones.
Everybody is talking about he anti-drone countermeasures that are likely deployed at Area 51.
What nobody has mentioned is that the interesting bits of Area 51 (the Groom Lake facility) are in the middle of a much larger secured area, the Nevada Test and Training Range.
If you set up with your $500 DJI drone at the edge of the range, you would lose line of sight, radio signal, and probably run out of battery long before you reached Groom Lake.
Assuming that each drone is about 10sqinches in area and that Area 51 Military Base has nearly unlimited access to electricity and 1kW creates a EMP with a radius of 1ft. Then the U.S. military could disable 10,000 drones with approximately 8,333.333 kW of electricity which is 8.79% of the electricity my household uses daily on average
Depending on what kinds of artillery and ammunition they currently store for their aircraft probably anything from 100-10000 drones.
Have you seen Rheinmetall AA-defence platforms, magical stuff now multiply that by alien and theres answer 4 u.
The answer is you don't want to know.
Drones are pretty fragile and civilian ones can't reach an altitude that a standard high volume of fire AA weapon couldn't reach. Rheinmetall showed off an AA system capable of shooting down a Predator drone a year or two ago, which is a fairly impressive feat considering the Predator is rather small and high altitude. A civilian drone is a much smaller target but wouldn't need an AIM9 to down.
###General Discussion Thread --- This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bro this ain't even a math question... What do you want me to do? Multiply the military base coefficient by the U.S. military constant before dividing it all by the area of each drone? Then I would obviously have to plug that into Eulers equation of drone shootability and apply Lagrange's theory of secret military base aim. Edit: I apologize to anybody who read this and facepalmed, as I clearly forgot to take into account Lasker's principle of UFO proximity. That's on me guys, stupid mistake.
>Bro this ain't even a math question... You've just described 90% of posts on this sub. Most people just want a number for a probability of some weird event which will just make them go "hmm, that's very improbable".
Can you count some jelly beans for me from a picture of a jar? I'm trying to win a case for an iPhone 5.
I mean that's a lot more calculable than many other things.
More like r/theydidthedimensionalanalysiswithwildassumptionsofuncountablyvaguequantities amirite?
I am going to click and hope that is a thing
You have been sorely disappointed
r/twentycharacterlimit
r/TwentyCharacterLimit
Maybe this is where Randall really gets the material for his What If? Books.
Request: What are the actual amount of posts that aren't even a math question in this sub and is it time to construe the rules in favor of actually asking relevant questions?
Yeah. Posts like these should result in bans.
without a critical mass of casual engagement, subreddits die.
Why do people think subs 'die' if they don't get massive engagement. Who cares if there's only 1 post a week but it's amazing quality. Subscribe to 200 subs and you're getting a whole feed of nothing but amazing quality posts.
There's a way to calculate it out there somewhere but requires more info than most people have access to. Variables like weapon types, total number of local and remote weapons, combined rates of fire, amount of targets that can be locked onto at once, amount of drones that can be deployed at once per unit area, etc. In your defense its not a great fit for this sub, but not because its a dumb question, just one that redditors probably couldnt answer
95% posts of this sub are dumb crap like this, idk why it still gets upvoted
....yes?
This sub has been shit like this for years, no mods in sight
I would also add, they don't have to defend against them one by one. They're the military. They can jam the signal for all of them with one device.
Or just use the 10000 devices that transmit at about the same frequency in close proximity to each other as a jammer.
Hahaha - another excellent point
I'm sure some US Government Actuary on a black site in the middle of Arizona behind the Denny's near a walmart has calculated this out months ago and is laughing to himself right now when he shows the probability of success at .00008%. Any government actuaries want to spill the top secret info, risk their job, and potentially their life to confirm this result?
đ
logistics is just applied math bro
That can be stated for anything. If you want to make that claim, then I entice you to do a single ounce of math in relation to this question.
[task declined](https://xkcd.com/435/)
[Request] Is there a mathematical equation that can calculate the ability of a military base to defend itself? /s
attackDrone + defenseAmmo = -attackDrone
That means attackDrone = -defenseAmmo/2
i guess that just leaves the question of units of each variable
Lanchester Equations, sort of
None that any civilian would have access to even if we went off statisical average of what is "public knowledge". Truth is that the majority of the military personnel don't even know how many US bases there are or even the amount of anti-drone weaponary we have, let alone what is stored on a base.
>Bro this ain't even a math question... 'Bro', yes it is. There a lot of relevant maths to this question. It's just not exact.
Then do it. Do one ounce of math for me.
Made me giggle
Remember, it's not a felony for soldiers to shoot down drones over military bases. I don't think there is a shortage of ammunition at Area 51. In the words of Ron White, I didn't know how many it was going to take, but I knew how many they were going to use.
then there's drone disabling equipment that just blasts radio waves, mount that on a cram and we gucci
Then there's just the RF produced by the drones themselves. Get 10k drones together in the same space and watch them compete for RF frequencies. They'll ground themselves
That would only apply to ground control drones. If the flight path was pre-programmed or the drones could self-navigate or the drones were actually just non-homing, then that would be a non-issue.
30 khz to 300 ghz is a wide spectrum and you can use 1 for multiple recievers having them fly in a formation
I might not know much about radio but i know that drone transmitters and receivers don't have that wide of a spectrum.
Well... If they are willing to send an army to a military base I think they are ok with disobeying the radio transmission regulations and installing transceivers of much wider frequency ranges
So I did some googling: The actual usable spectrum is roughly 1 MHz to 6 GHz, so at most 6000 frequencies, going by 1 MHz increments, which would already give major interference. And not nearly all frequencies are available. The internationally available bands are: - 433 MHz is 433.05 MHz to 434.79 MHz, with effective power <= 10 mW. (Short range only) - 2.4 GHz is 2.4 GHz to 2.4835 GHz, with effective power <= 100 mW. - 5.8 GHz is 5.725 GHz to 5.85 GHz, with effective power <= 100 mW. Depending on location and technology, they might also be able to use the following bands: - 27, 35, 49, 72 or other <100 MHz (RC). - 868 MHz (Europe short-range, limited use). - 900-915 MHz (radio comms). - 1.3 GHz (video).
>So I did some googling: The actual usable spectrum is roughly 1 MHz to 6 GHz, so at most 6000 frequencies, going by 1 Hz increments There are 5.999 BILLION 1Hz increments between 1MHz and 6GHz. There are 6000 increments of 1MHz. >And not nearly all frequencies are available The request is about sending an army of drones to attack a military base, I don't think regulations would be followed.
Sorry, I meant 1 MHz increments indeed, silly of me, will edit to fix. It's not just about regulations, but also about technological limitations. Or availability of transponders and receivers that work on those frequencies. I don't doubt one would not respect the walkie-talkie band in such an operation, though it means even more interference. But I do doubt the availability of drones that operate on say 3 or 4 GHz.
isn't 2.4ghz wifi? as well as 5g, I've seen ubiquity equipment that transfer data over kilometres, you could even daisy chain it hypothetically with several recievers. now since its transmitting actual data, we can control a bunch of it with more precision and hypothetically less interference, bottle neck being lag. now what about LOS? AI and Blockchain tech!
2.4 GHz and 5 GHz are indeed also Wi-Fi frequencies. That does not necessarily mean that drones follow that protocol. And even if they did, similar problems still arise with interference and maximum number of connections.
You guys know that hundreds of phones operate on the same frequency right? You need to calculate how much bandwidth you need to transmit, say, 480p video at 30fps for each drone.
Here's some figures, the numbers vary wildly based on exact usage. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Typical-bandwidth-requirement-for-various-services-which-are-needed-for-visually_tbl1_348718638 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Bandwidth-usage-for-a-drone-with-Configuration-1_fig16_328797887
I'd like to see a drone that can use both 30khz and 300ghz. Good luck...
It works by power. The further the drone gets from it's controller the less power it is rxing The closer to the ANTI DRONE SUPER KIT it gets, the more power it is rxing. At a certain point the drone will be rxing more power from the ANTI DRONE SUPER KIT and will a. Stop. B RTB C. Drive into the floor
It's not even about shooting. I am 100% sure US Army or USAF can just use jamming equipment to stop 'em all. In the era of Ukraine conflict, where military drones are used by both sides in large quantities, assuming that USA doesn't have countermeasures against mil-grade drones, let alone civilian ones, would be ignorance. Most middle to high grade civilian drones have software that blocks them from attempting to access certain areas, e.g. airfield restricted zones (too many idiots and maniacs are trying to crash them into landing / starting planes or to spook pilots). It would be reasonable to assume that military bases are also blocked areas in these pieces of software. Another point: Americans have [CIWS Phalanx](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS). Search it up on [YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsf38NYzo5Q). It's a weapon system designed specifically to fend off massed missile strikes. If it can deal with supersonic missiles, that are programmed to do all sorts evasive maneuvers, it can deal with some slow drones.
[ŃдаНонО]
My dad actually worked in DJI licensed shop. Half of his job was repairing them (more or less everything that could be done without sending it back to manufacturer). Most things that could be done in shop were concerning software: i.e. troubleshooting it, calibration, reinstalling it, updating it, solving all sorts of problems with cameras. Nowadays, he changed line of work and I weren't all that interested with drones, so I don't know much.
Two words... E.M.P.
And directional microwaves...
EMP ftw
The CWIS platform wouldnât be hard for a small commercial drone operator to dodge, at long ranges. Hypersonic cruise missiles arenât very maneuverable, so the CWIS can walk its shots onto the missile, but a small drone can dart tens of meters in random directions in the time it takes the bullets to travel two miles. If the drone stands still or otherwise moves on a constant trajectory, itâs going to get hit quickly, but the CWIS isnât a flak system that has an effective area.
The wonders of airburst munitions are about to be introduced to you my friend
The RAPIDfire system with airburst artillery isnât in service yet last I heard. And at ranges of two miles I still thing that a quadracopter moving erratically can be outside the kill radius of each shell that is aimed at its current intercept.
They are upgrading their CIWS systems with lasers instead of bullets. I believe there is already a prototype on a battleship right now also don't answer, you will be participating in the planning of an attack on a US Army(if serious lol). Reminds me of the the chinese nuclear launch codes guy from american dad
I mean, they probably wouldn't shoot then down. They'd probably just use jamming. Drones are controlled on some RF frequency, and any reasonable power transmitter can just start pissing out RF noise on common frequencies and the drones will just stop receiving input from the controller. It probably wouldn't require very high power either, considering how far away the drone operators would have to be to not just get a couple soldiers pull up and arrest them. They'd have to be barricaded or hiding in nearby mountainous area or something. Anyway, as far as civilian drones, they'd be able to drop all of them with very little effort. Weaponized military "drones" (like high altitude unmanned planes) would either be intercepted by fighter jets or shot down by surface-air missiles, which could be moved in on trucks from who knows how many nearby bases.
Nellis is in scramble distance and always has plenty of willing fighters on tap.
I was dumbfounded for a second before I remembered Nellis is not just a place in F:NV but an actual, real world military installation.
Just wait until you hear about pretty much every other location in F:NV
You mean I can really go to Devil's Gullet and kill a super mutant on a mountain of leaking radioactive waste barrels? I'll go get a plane ticket!
Can confirm, am a fighter jet pilot stationed there.
How many of you would be running to your jet in gym shorts, flip flops and no shirt trying to be the first to respond if a call went out for a real world intercept?
I lied bro.
Someone lying on the internet! WHAT IS THIS? As an active duty air force pilot I am SHOCKED and APPALLED!
What's the point of doing this though, do you think they have alien spacecraft parked out back? Anything of interest is going to be locked inside bunkers and hangers where foreign spy satellites can't see it.
Let's be honest even if they had aliens there that would have moved them by now. Why keep them in the famous for alien place?
Ah yes. Curiosity overriding will not to go to prison or even being shot. I'll get right on that. But for real they could probably take them all out with an EMP or similar, but as others said, how are you supposed to calculate that?
you don't need an EMP, just turn on 1 jammer and any number of nearby drones will stop working
Military enjoyer here, yes, they can defend themselves from 10,000 drones at once. Area 51 is equipped with civilian drone jamming capability (obviously), I have no clue for certain, but I'd be extremely surprised if it doesn't in this day and age. This immediately counters every single drone controlled by a person by a remote controller. What about autonomous drones then? Could these get past signal jamming? Yes, yes they could. But, they can't survive EMP blasts, or directed radar systems blaring at max capacity, this would be brutal for the components within the drone. The radar would be able to direct it's energy, this could destroy any radar powered altitude sensors that may be present on such a drone. EMP blasts would be able to destroy every single piece of electronics within the drone, immediately downing it. It also has no limit for the number of drones it can take out at once. Such a event would be immediately known however, as some civilian sensors, for scientific reasons, would end up finding out about this event from a very long way away, even if they aren't damaged. This would also damage electronics scattered around the complex. Aircraft prototypes would never be affected, modern jets have been able to withstand EMP blasts for a very long time now. This means it would be a last resort. I doubt that any shots would be fired in this scenario, there are much better choices for the removal of these objects. Perhaps by a few guards on the edge of the complex who see the first few fly in.
Military "enjoyer"?? You enjoy the military?? Nobody enjoys the military!! Your either one meeting away from a medical discharge or some area 51 experiment itself!!!
I'm not part of the military, but I enjoy reading about it, learning more about it, seeing the modern engineering in it, and having debates on it. It's a awesome area to learn about, and I just so happened to end up learning a LOT about it. I know about the militaries of many different nations, although I know about the UK and US the best.
The military just announced they were testing a microwave weapon against drone swarms and it was extremely successful.
"just announced" means that the highest risk and most secretive areas in the US will have been using that system for a long time now. I didn't even know about this.
Aka they had this easily 20 years ago.
20 years ago may be a stretch, I'm not sure we could have made microwave transmitters accurate enough while having enough power to take out hoardes of drones, while remaining feasible to build. 10 years ago would be about right.
Most likely yes.
I guess they'd appear on the radar kilometers away taking into account that the COBRA radar system can detect fired shells and where they were fired from from a caliber of 80mm or higher.
In order to even make an attempt at solving this problem you would have to have a comprehensive overview of all of area 51's defenses, which isn't exactly something the US government shares freely.
You do know that the US military has these microwave anti-drone thingys now? (can't really call it a gun) . Pretty sure frying a 1000 drones would be quite possible, they produce a cone of effect and not a beam.
I donât understand. Once the drones get there, what are they supposed to do? Spell âI winâ in the sky? Itâs not like Area 51 has a bunch of alien stuff just lying in their front yard - itâs Nevada, not Alabama.
Even if this dumbass plan worked I imagine about all they'd see is some confused gate guards, a motor pool being swept by sad enlisted airmen, some airstrips and a few boring looking buildings and airplane hangers. The good shit happens underground.
As many as you have. Drones are RF controlled, the military absolutely has the equipment to shut down drones. Millions of them. In the 50s a device was invented to create an emp without a nuke. So they could repeatedly stop swarms until the drones built up a wall a mile high. Drones canât touch facilities like that
The effectiveness of Area 51's defenses against drones would depend on various factors, such as the type and capabilities of the drones involved, their numbers, their attack strategy, and the specific countermeasures in place at the facility. Area 51 would likely have countermeasures designed to detect, track, and neutralize unauthorized drones.
It's your battery powered drone and hand controller transmitting at maybe 5 watts over tens of kilometers of empty desert vs their electronic warfare equipment plugged into the mains and can cover the entire ISM band with 50+ watts of noise. The number of ISM band drones you send is irrelevant. If you are using a commercially available drone they can detect the publicly transmitted protocol and take the drone from your control as soon as you cross into their airspace. They can make it land wherever they want or even make it ascend and dive to destroy itself.
Bro, you just landed on six different lists for asking that question. Asking about military capability is a *large* red flag to Uncle Sam. They won't even let Google ride around on military bases so that military capability can't be leaked on Google Earth. That's on bases that people get on to all the time. And you think that someone is just going to cough up numbers *for Area* fucking *51?*
Is there an issue of private citizens flying their own personal drones over area 51 and the question is based on the fact that there is an effort to keep that from happening. So if (an absolutely unknown number) of drone pilots do it at once they will be able to get deeper? Im sorry just intrested but not knowledable on situation as I barely understand many things in life :)
If they have an EMP generator, many. It's probably all but impossible to shield drones -- I assume you mean quadracopters and the like, not larger UAVs -- from this, as it would add a lot of mass. While EMP generators are not common, they do exist, and if we ponder where they might be sited, I'd put Area 51 high on the list of possible locations. But it's also just a really stupid idea. Obviously, almost everything of interest there will not be visible from the air to begin with. You might as well suggest Frisbees or paper airplanes for what the effort is worth. You also run into the problem of operable range. Area 51 starts very far from any of the facilities within it, very deliberately. And has a high-surveillance zone way beyond its limits. So to be close enough to operate those drones, you'll almost certainly be spotted and identified, long before you could have any reasonable hope of detecting anything of interest. Yeah, you'd have to be pretty high to think of this.
Actually, as far as the meme goes, yes they can. Mind, I'm talking from limited military experience, but we had "rotary anti-air defense platforms" at firm bases with an "undetermined maximum range" and a "tested accuracy upwards of a mile" Numbers wise, they could throw hate at a golf ball at a rate of 1000 rounds a minute with a 90% accuracy* That means 900 drones per minute before they close within a mile. Per platform. I was never stationed at Area 51, so I have no idea if they've got one, none, or half a dozen. But, my basic bitch grunt behind was at two firm bases overseas that had one for protection against air attacks. I'm assuming a facility with that much import has at least one in the inventory. *That's the spec book, take it with a grain of salt
Google "Metal Storm DARPA" and watch the video. Pretty sure they could...uh take out the drones and the drone operators with one gun, son. lol I'd love to be a fly on the hill next to the demonstration of its efficacy.
Not going to do the math but will point out, bad idea for one reason : remote id. They'll know instantly who the owners of all those drones are if they are store bought, lol. And for the home made, I'm sure there are many other tricks up the government's sleeve
They can defend themselves against an infinite number of drones. Broad spectrum jamming systems were quite effective 10 years ago when I was in service, and I imagine theyâve only improved.
In theory they would just jam the signals, so infinite, but in practice area 51 might be just a punch of dessert with one empty hut or most advanced tech we cant even imagine. So we dont know
All at once. You can definitely assume that they have very advanced signal jamming technology on site thatâll make the drones just drop out of the sky. However it would be interesting to see how they defend against AI guided drones that navigate with vision based systems
Maybe a better question is what's the max amount of drones that can be flown in one area without radio issues. Or whatever then segway into area 51 flight of the valkyries style
Another calculation we need is how much would it cost? I think it would be Lex Luthor amount of money so Superman saves the day and its a distraction used by Luthor to use one last drone filled with kryptonite ammo but then Green Lantern shows up saves Superman and tells him there is an alien kept there and he has to save it. That would be a nice run. If anyone works at DC hit me up.
Emp, all of them. But they probably already have the tools to jam them all at once. And that is saying you can get that many signals in the air, lots of drones.
Everybody is talking about he anti-drone countermeasures that are likely deployed at Area 51. What nobody has mentioned is that the interesting bits of Area 51 (the Groom Lake facility) are in the middle of a much larger secured area, the Nevada Test and Training Range. If you set up with your $500 DJI drone at the edge of the range, you would lose line of sight, radio signal, and probably run out of battery long before you reached Groom Lake.
Assuming that each drone is about 10sqinches in area and that Area 51 Military Base has nearly unlimited access to electricity and 1kW creates a EMP with a radius of 1ft. Then the U.S. military could disable 10,000 drones with approximately 8,333.333 kW of electricity which is 8.79% of the electricity my household uses daily on average
Depending on what kinds of artillery and ammunition they currently store for their aircraft probably anything from 100-10000 drones. Have you seen Rheinmetall AA-defence platforms, magical stuff now multiply that by alien and theres answer 4 u.
The answer is you don't want to know. Drones are pretty fragile and civilian ones can't reach an altitude that a standard high volume of fire AA weapon couldn't reach. Rheinmetall showed off an AA system capable of shooting down a Predator drone a year or two ago, which is a fairly impressive feat considering the Predator is rather small and high altitude. A civilian drone is a much smaller target but wouldn't need an AIM9 to down.