Chinese UAVs News & Discussions

[Vi-va]

For drone defense, it's a three-dimensional defense system.
Laser defense system mainly targets low altitude slow speed UAVs;
CIWS mainly targets low altitude high speed drones or missiles;
Higher and larger drones are where air defense missiles come into play.
Loitering Munition is the working range of CIWS.

As for this micro-drone you posted, think about it for a moment. How far can it fly? How much ammo can it carry? How much damage can those munitions do? ------ Civilian drones can indeed be military, but you need to consider its range and ammo capacity.

As for swarm drones to intercept swarm drones. That doesn't follow basic military logic. It is only possible in extreme situations.
Intercepting attacking drones with drones, these intercepting drones are just much more advanced than the attacking drones in terms of flight speed\attack accuracy\flight time\number of drones and other data.
If I have so many more advanced drones, why don't I use them for offense, but choose to use them for defense?

The Russian-Ukrainian war was indeed a battlefield for drones. But for the most part, this war is still a “security war”, and both sides have very limited capabilities. This is completely different from the high-intensity wars that PLA plans to face in the future. Perhaps this war has more value for PAP.

Here are the PLAGF's active weapons for the different classes of drones.

View attachment 72863
View attachment 72864
View attachment 72865

Air defense is all about ROI. All the defense systems you listed above were designed for traditional targets.

TIme changed. UAV with AI can find targets all by themselves, and those UAV may connected with each other, those small drones can share vision, situation awareness, computility, with price tag tens of bucks or hundreds of buck.

All the defense systems you listed above are very expensive.

A much cheaper solution is needed. Swarm is the one of the potential solution.

 

[yusheng]

The most effective combat between manned aircraft is launching missiles, UAV (what kind of uav?) can be the same:


these are missiles specialized for hitting UAV and launched by UAV

 

[Michael]

Air defense is all about ROI. All the defense systems you listed above were designed for traditional targets.

TIme changed. UAV with AI can find targets all by themselves, and those UAV may connected with each other, those small drones can share vision, situation awareness, computility, with price tag tens of bucks or hundreds of buck.

All the defense systems you listed above are very expensive.

A much cheaper solution is needed. Swarm is the one of the potential solution.

The cost of using the laser defense system is very low ($1 per use). It can handle a large number of small, slow targets simultaneously.
The 625E's machine gun is primarily aimed at low-altitude, high-speed targets, and the rounds it fires don't cost much either. When it uses missiles to deal with medium- and medium-sized targets flying at medium altitude, the cost of using them is higher, but the price difference between these missiles and the price of medium- and medium-sized targets flying at medium altitude is very small or even lower.
The HQ17A is primarily aimed at large targets flying at medium to high altitudes. For example, the MQ-9B ......
Advanced air defense systems are all-encompassing defenses consisting of multiple weapon systems.

Swarm UAV is for offense not defense. Using it for defense is not appropriate.
In an emergency, we can use a high speed FPV to counter an enemy's slow dropping UAV. however, if we have a laser defense system or a 625E at this point, the cost and effectiveness of interception will be much better. The experience of Russia-Ukraine battlefield shows that the use of shotguns can be just as good a defense against slow projectile UAVs. By the same token, a soldier with a slingshot can deal with a slow-dropping UAV just as well.

The HQ-17A is equipped with one missile. It is actually a Loitering Munition. when the radar detects an enemy Swarm UAV, this missile lifts off early and stays cruising in a certain airspace. When it finds the enemy Swarm UAV in the right position, it will rush towards the enemy Swarm UAV at high speed and detonate the fragmentation warhead. The numerous small, high-speed fragments will destroy a large number of Swarm UAVs.

@yusheng Using UAVs against UAVs (including Swarm UAVs) is definitely a good way to go. I totally agree with this view as well. What I object to is using Swarm UAV to defend against Swarm UAV. it's not a concept.

 

[yusheng]

PLA training for

 

[Michael]

PLA training for

PLAGF-affiliated special forces and PAPs often conduct this kind of anti-drone tactical training, and even SWAT often conducts similar training. We often see official accounts on Chinese social media platforms putting out such news.
But this is completely different from the anti-drone tactics of the PLAGF main force, which has much more luxurious equipment and a wide range of tactics at their disposal. And of course, the drones they face are much more advanced than these drones. They have very powerful electronic jamming vehicles, and it's very difficult for such small drones to get close.

 

[yusheng]

they just prepare for anything that may come.

 

[StrategicBear]

Shanghai Aerospace's "Sleeve Sword" mini missile. Compared to the "spear", the "sleeve sword" has a slight advantage in size and weight, with a length of still 0.5 meters but an increased bullet diameter of 6 centimeters, and a launch weight of 4 kilograms (2.5 kilograms for the missile body and approximately 1.5 kilograms for the launch device). Its maximum range has been increased to 3 kilometers and its maximum shooting height is 2000 meters. Adopting television or infrared imaging guidance system, with automatic target matching function, it can automatically detect, track, identify and lock targets, surpassing the technical level of "spear".
View attachment 73002
View attachment 73003
The Sleeve Sword missile adopts TV guidance or infrared imaging guidance, which can automatically detect, track, identify, and lock targets. Its intelligence level is very high. It is a small-sized, lightweight, but highly capable missile. A soldier can carry up to 12 missiles in two backpacks, with a total weight of only 31.5 kilograms.
The Sleeve Sword Missile is a miniature multi-purpose missile positioned as a precision strike weapon for individual soldiers. It is cheaper and more flexible to use than current portable anti tank missiles and portable air defense missiles, and can be equipped in large quantities. It is more accurate than current individual weapons such as rifles, machine guns, submachine guns, sniper rifles, grenade launchers, mortars, etc. It can greatly improve the firepower, accuracy, and range of individual soldier attacks in the army, fundamentally changing the history of individual soldier firepower in the army!
The key to the large-scale production and use of individual micro missiles lies in the cost. If the cost is too expensive and not worth the loss, its development prospects will be constrained. The Americans were the first to invent the spear missile. However, they finally found that the development of this weapon system was not cost-effective, so they slowed down the pace of research and development. So far, no large number of weapons have been installed.
However, the Chinese came from behind and built the sleeve arrow missile in only six years. At present, they have received many orders. This weapon system can only be mass-produced and used in China.

Many soldiers would hate to be on the receiving end of a missile as small and deadly as this.... makes RPGs seems more cute and "familiar"...lol.

 

[nang2]

This response of yours reminds me of a story from years ago.

A female Chinese student studying in Japan. One day, she was on a bus going to school when she saw a Japanese grandmother who had no seat. So she took the initiative to get up and offer her seat to the grandmother and asked her to rest in her seat. However, the Chinese female student was complained by the Japanese grandmother. The reason for the Japanese grandmother's complaint was. The Chinese female student discriminated her as an elderly person ......​

At this moment, I feel like I am like this Chinese schoolgirl who was castigated.

I inquired about your identity to better communicate with you, not for any other purpose, much less with malice.

China's military situation is not fully publicized, and not much is known even by native-born Chinese. But the native-born Chinese know a lot about the logic of PLA thinking and fighting spirit. For this group, I just need to tell them some of the PLA's current weapon systems, without having to explain the PLA's reasons for doing so.
Overseas Chinese. Generally don't know much about China's current military situation, and most of their perceptions are still stuck in decades ago.
Some overseas Chinese still retain traditional Chinese thinking logic. For them, I just need to provide more information about the current situation, without having to explain the difference in thinking logic due to the difference in thinking culture.
Some overseas Chinese have fully integrated into western thinking logic. For them, I can only explain it exactly the way I would explain it to a Westerner. Starting from a completely different military combat thinking logic and analyzing it until a different weaponry system is formed.

I still don't know if my explanation makes the situation clearer or further deepens the misunderstanding ...........

My identity has been clearly demonstrated with the flags I use on my profile. There is no need for you to drill deeper. But if that doesn't satisfy you, I will repeat what I have shared before in this forum. I grew up in XinJiang, China, at a military base. Both of my parents are army officers. Both ranked colonel. The middle school I went to was made up largely with the children from the military. Many of them followed their parents footsteps and joined the military.

 

[Michael]

My identity has been clearly demonstrated with the flags I use on my profile. There is no need for you to drill deeper. But if that doesn't satisfy you, I will repeat what I have shared before in this forum. I grew up in XinJiang, China, at a military base. Both of my parents are army officers. Both ranked colonel. The middle school I went to was made up largely with the children from the military. Many of them followed their parents footsteps and joined the military.

I'm not trying to dig deeper into your identity. I just want to know the extent to which Chinese culture has influenced you, which determines the way we communicate with each other more efficiently.
Since you grew up and lived in China for many years, it would be very effective for us to communicate directly with each other using Chinese cultural logic.
There are some Chinese-Americans in the PDF, but they have not been influenced much by Chinese culture and it would be very difficult to communicate with them using Chinese cultural logic. They are more receptive to English cultural logic.
That's why I asked that question earlier.

 

[nang2]

I'm not trying to dig deeper into your identity. I just want to know the extent to which Chinese culture has influenced you, which determines the way we communicate with each other more efficiently.
Since you grew up and lived in China for many years, it would be very effective for us to communicate directly with each other using Chinese cultural logic.
There are some Chinese-Americans in the PDF, but they have not been influenced much by Chinese culture and it would be very difficult to communicate with them using Chinese cultural logic. They are more receptive to English cultural logic.
That's why I asked that question earlier.

As you said, Chinese people are realistic, or shall we say, practical. If you have read my posts above, you should sense the almost extreme end of practicality, which marks the distrust of anything unproven. Granted, the recent military technology improvement is quite impressive. However, much of it is still unproven. Peace is a blessing but ironically also a curse for military.

By the way, logic is logic. It is just a proven way to deduce propositions based on facts. I hate Karl Marx's idea of multi-logicalism, as if logic is different based on people's identity, culture background, etc, etc. It is an insult to intelligence and a lazy/irresponsible way to avoid productive debate.

 

[Vi-va]

The cost of using the laser defense system is very low ($1 per use). It can handle a large number of small, slow targets simultaneously.
The 625E's machine gun is primarily aimed at low-altitude, high-speed targets, and the rounds it fires don't cost much either. When it uses missiles to deal with medium- and medium-sized targets flying at medium altitude, the cost of using them is higher, but the price difference between these missiles and the price of medium- and medium-sized targets flying at medium altitude is very small or even lower.
The HQ17A is primarily aimed at large targets flying at medium to high altitudes. For example, the MQ-9B ......
Advanced air defense systems are all-encompassing defenses consisting of multiple weapon systems.

Swarm UAV is for offense not defense. Using it for defense is not appropriate.
In an emergency, we can use a high speed FPV to counter an enemy's slow dropping UAV. however, if we have a laser defense system or a 625E at this point, the cost and effectiveness of interception will be much better. The experience of Russia-Ukraine battlefield shows that the use of shotguns can be just as good a defense against slow projectile UAVs. By the same token, a soldier with a slingshot can deal with a slow-dropping UAV just as well.

The HQ-17A is equipped with one missile. It is actually a Loitering Munition. when the radar detects an enemy Swarm UAV, this missile lifts off early and stays cruising in a certain airspace. When it finds the enemy Swarm UAV in the right position, it will rush towards the enemy Swarm UAV at high speed and detonate the fragmentation warhead. The numerous small, high-speed fragments will destroy a large number of Swarm UAVs.

@yusheng Using UAVs against UAVs (including Swarm UAVs) is definitely a good way to go. I totally agree with this view as well. What I object to is using Swarm UAV to defend against Swarm UAV. it's not a concept.

Laser defense system and 625E can only cover several km² at most. The cost of deployment is very high.

Take Ukraine War for example, you need thousands of laser defense system and 625E to cover the front line, not to mention the logistic supply lines. You will need hundreds of thousands of laser defense system and 625E to fully cover the miliary bases, troops.

Then you will need much more to cover civil power plants, damns, water plants, refineries, factories.

The caculation you did is misleding. The laser power cost and bullets of 625E is just a tiny portion of the whole weapons system. You have to take rader, communication, networks, operation cost, spare parts into account.

And again, the laser or 625E
Can't deal with swarm
Can't deal with Loitering Munition covered by armour
Hard to deal with high speed target, like 3 mach, or higher. Munition like SDB, can easily penetrate laser defense.
Those systems were designed for traditional targets.

ROI of Laser defense system and 625E is very bad.

 

[yusheng]

first， war is expensive, yet victory is priceless.

second, If the military were a company, who would go bankrupt first？

The United States showcased the latest domestically produced suicide drone delivered to the Marine Corps, with the biggest advantage being its price.
The order is 12 million US dollars, with one aircraft costing nearly 100000 US dollars.
It looks like it's at the level of 2000 dollars in DJI.

third, War is Art , Whether it's worth it depends on the situation. China will not use missiles to attack a tent ， but will shed the last drop of blood If necessary.

China has all tec-means in DroneWar, but no one here can and will tell you how Chinese military use them.

last, what is the base of war? a country's industry.

 

[Michael]

first， war is expensive, yet victory is priceless.
second, If the military were a company, who would go bankrupt first？
third, War is Art , Whether it's worth it depends on the situation. China will not use missiles to attack a tent ， but will shed the last drop of blood If necessary.
last, what is the base of war? a country's industry.

I agree with you. I think there are some additions that need to be made, but that's beyond the scope of this thread. So, that's it.

Laser defense system and 625E can only cover several km² at most. The cost of deployment is very high.

Take Ukraine War for example, you need thousands of laser defense system and 625E to cover the front line, not to mention the logistic supply lines. You will need hundreds of thousands of laser defense system and 625E to fully cover the miliary bases, troops.

Then you will need much more to cover civil power plants, damns, water plants, refineries, factories.

The caculation you did is misleding. The laser power cost and bullets of 625E is just a tiny portion of the whole weapons system. You have to take rader, communication, networks, operation cost, spare parts into account.

And again, the laser or 625E
Can't deal with swarm
Can't deal with Loitering Munition covered by armour
Hard to deal with high speed target, like 3 mach, or higher. Munition like SDB, can easily penetrate laser defense.
Those systems were designed for traditional targets.

ROI of Laser defense system and 625E is very bad.

1, We are discussing a topic about PLA weapon systems which can only be based on PLA's strategic tactics. Similarly, it is not appropriate to analyze the US military with the case of drones in the Russian-Ukrainian theater. ------ Special Forces and PAP tactical discussions are out of scope.

2, We are discussing the direct cost of use, excluding platform cost and support cost. If these costs were to be included, it would be impossible to calculate. Do you also need to consider the cost of the communication system of the swarm UCAV?

3, The 625E is based on the Pantsir s1 shell close air defense system and the Chinese ship mounted CIWS. the Chinese ship mounted CIWS can intercept supersonic armored targets. Here are the rounds it comes with and you can judge the 625E's capabilities based on those.

As for whether it defends against SDB, I'm not sure. But, the SDB launch platform would first need to be exposed to our air defense missiles.

Offensive and defensive systems, always evolve in an upward spiral, and, surely, the offensive system comes first, and then the corresponding defensive system emerges. In actual combat, passive defense is one of the means for tactical needs, and offense is the best defense.

The core issue of our discussion is “using Swarm UCAV to defend against Swarm UCAV”. On this issue, I am against it.

Swarm UCAV is better suited for offense than defense. Of course, if we apply the previous point “offense is the best defense”, I have to agree. If the Swarm UCAV is simply used to build a defense grid over our key targets to ward off enemy Swarm UCAVs, I am strongly opposed to this approach.

 

[yusheng]

“using Swarm UCAV to defend against Swarm UCAV” is a fake topic.
is this logical or meaningful to discuss " swarm fighter(airplane) to defend against swarm fighter" in WW2 without discussing something else , such as their misssion, quality, quantity, ground support ?
if UCAV, how about their capablities: AI level, speed, maneuverability？
and one even did not give a definite and explicit conception of UCAV.
Is a unmanned attack helicopter with antidroneairtoairmissles a UCAV?

 

[Vi-va]

I agree with you. I think there are some additions that need to be made, but that's beyond the scope of this thread. So, that's it.


1, We are discussing a topic about PLA weapon systems which can only be based on PLA's strategic tactics. Similarly, it is not appropriate to analyze the US military with the case of drones in the Russian-Ukrainian theater. ------ Special Forces and PAP tactical discussions are out of scope.

2, We are discussing the direct cost of use, excluding platform cost and support cost. If these costs were to be included, it would be impossible to calculate. Do you also need to consider the cost of the communication system of the swarm UCAV?

3, The 625E is based on the Pantsir s1 shell close air defense system and the Chinese ship mounted CIWS. the Chinese ship mounted CIWS can intercept supersonic armored targets. Here are the rounds it comes with and you can judge the 625E's capabilities based on those.
View attachment 73185
As for whether it defends against SDB, I'm not sure. But, the SDB launch platform would first need to be exposed to our air defense missiles.

Offensive and defensive systems, always evolve in an upward spiral, and, surely, the offensive system comes first, and then the corresponding defensive system emerges. In actual combat, passive defense is one of the means for tactical needs, and offense is the best defense.

The core issue of our discussion is “using Swarm UCAV to defend against Swarm UCAV”. On this issue, I am against it.

Swarm UCAV is better suited for offense than defense. Of course, if we apply the previous point “offense is the best defense”, I have to agree. If the Swarm UCAV is simply used to build a defense grid over our key targets to ward off enemy Swarm UCAVs, I am strongly opposed to this approach.

There is no way you can use traditional way to counter swarm uav. It's just a matter of ROI.

You enemy can use millions of small UAV in the same time in future, but you can't never counter millions of small UAV no matter how many laser system and 625 you have.

UAV are cheaper and cheaper day after day, while 625 cost is fixed(plus inflation).

Something new is needed, it could be swarm to counter swarm, or not. But if you stick to traditional air defense system, there is no way out.

Last but not least, you have to consider the system cost, including full life cycle cost, otherwise, the ROI discussion is meaningless.

625 upper limit is low, 25mm calibar means short range. 6 means you can shoot thousands of bullets per minute at most.

25mm*6 means you can shoot down targets with 2-3 mach speed in 1-2km range. That's the upper limit. Realy combat effectiveness usually be even lower, much lower.

SDB is covered by armor, laser system is useless in this case basically. You have to use APFSDS to penetrate those target(cost goes up). Even though, due to 25mm caliber, SDB is too fast, and too close to you, the kinetic energy will make enough damage unless SDB was hit and exploded in the air.

SDB is high speed target, while 625 can only shoot target in 1-2km, the 625 system can shoot 1-2 SDB at most. Your enemy can offload tens of them, 625 system is doomed in a few munites.

SDB launch platform can be anything in future, UAV or F-35. That's out of discussion here. Completely different topic.