And assuming each of the eighty thousand drones costs $200 each including ordnance, that's a very significant expenditure on an attack. And I'm not even sure if it would be feasibly possible given limited bandwidth to control them.

[–] Bread@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't know mate, that's only 16 million. The price of an F-22 is $150 million. Spending a ninth of a jet to win a war by strategically targeting the capital seems pretty cheap to me. Bring it up to the full cost and you have 750,000 drones. You are going to get overwhelmed by drones no matter how much ammo you have. It is too much.

[–] Cleverdawny@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Oh, if you're talking about drones which can operate over long distances you're talking about $20,000 drones, or more expensive. You'd need satcoms and that isn't cheap or lightweight.

[–] Bread@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I am talking about small commercial drones that act like suicide bombers. They go one way and can be real cheap. Just deploy somewhat locally.

[–] Cleverdawny@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

More expensive and less useful than you might think.

[–] oatscoop@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Tech gets cheaper each year and software becomes more advanced. You don't need wireless control when each drone can autonomously navigate to and identify a pre-programmed target.

The block II tomahawk cruise missile had that 40 years ago. That image processing and satellite communications capability is available in modern smartphones.