Fuchs,
Again, I think I've lost the point of your argument on UAV's. Yes, our enemies are sure to have them and will use them to the best of their ability, but it seems as if you're arguing that the US has no capability to counter the threat they pose. If that's the case, then I heartily disagree.
Without operational details, most UAV's above 3000'. UAV's at 3000' are audible but not visible to the naked eye, making manual AA hard.
I don't know enough about whether it produces enough heat for a MANPADs to shoot down.
Obviously, a radar gun system or laser/radar SAM could shoot one down, although they are quite small (<2-3m)
Agree with Entropy, countermeasures from enemy UAV are readily available.
It's important to keep in mind their low price. A competent administration could oder quantity produced tactical UAVs at prices of below 1,000 USD.
Hundreds could be launched to prepare for a specific fight and even if only half a dozen came back, it could still provide excellent recon results on a brigade area.
The cost would be comparable to a single monkey model MBT.
True but most .50s have optics nowadays. A sheet of fire directed aloft in the general direction has brought down many an aircraft and I know of one small UAV downed with 5.56 fire 'accidentally.' (Jill's recurring Ca/REMF battle, in this case between an MI UAV and the parent Brigades LRS Company ). I'll also reveal my age by saying that I along with many others was trained to produce (and practiced) Anti-Aircraft fire by a rifle company just firing every weapon rapidly in the general direction and have seen target sleeves with a lot of punctures. We quit that due to the air superiority we have enjoyed since 1951.It doesn't but that doesn't affect the M3M .50 cal on every Avenger, a system with great optics and an excellent tracker.I don't know enough about whether it produces enough heat for a MANPADs to shoot down.
Bookmarks