politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I wonder if a drone “carrier” would be a reasonable idea. It would certainly make a good movie.
Think of a big expensive reusable drone like a Reaper, able to fly in from hundreds of miles away, then loiter all day just out of range. When it sees a target, instead of launching an expensive missile, launch drones to targets. This lets you carry more and cheaper weapons, while also taking advantage of high quality reconnaissance and all day loitering
Actually, the US already has those. They are sailing logistic hubs which are converted merchant ships. It can support multiple helicopters landed at the same time and it can transport fuel and other goods. But more importantly, it can carry and control several shipping containers full of drones from a safe distance behind their warships in action. They are completely different to previous military logistic ships, they are considered asymmetric hybrid logistic combat platforms, or special ops mpyherships. And because they used to be merchant ships, they are extremily cheap compared to actual military ships.
The only official one known is the MV Ocean Trader. They are support ships so not official military commissioned ships.
The US, Russia and China (and maybe other countries) are experimenting with civilian ships carrying military gear in shipping containers. Like radar systems and missile systems, but also drone launchers and jammers. Russia is already known for their asymmetric warfare, with their seperstist armies fighting in Ukraine before they invaded, their shadow fleets and their mercenary armies in Africa. But China and the US are also operating in a similar way, finding a gray area between civil and military operations.
Why, you may ask? Well, during a conflict a military target is a valid target. But a civilian target is not. So why not equip a civilian target with military gear? That's also why the invasion in Ukraine was labeled by Russia as a "special military operation" instead of a war. Same as what the US did when they kidnapped Maduro and when they illegally attacked Iran. "Let's call it differently so we can get away with it."
Very informative, thanks!
But I wasnt thinking carrier like a ship, but a flying carrier, a mother ship . A drone that can loiter all day above a battlefield, then release dozens of cheap drones when needed could make a real impact. At the same time you could put money into the drone that gets there, recons, loiters, and returns,, while using the advantages of cheap short range suicide drones as your expendable “ammunition”.
Why not both? A cheap disposable drone will never have much range, loitering, reconnaissance, so needs help getting to the battlefield (unless it’s your own town as in Ukraine). But even an expensive long range drone can only go so far. Think of the logistics hub as the military base only a couple hundred miles from Target, wherever there is an ocean. The loitering drone be battlefield over site and response, then cheap suicide drones as the ammunition
There is also the concept of a cargo plane which can drop drone swarms. A few drones are for jamming, some have radar, some have missiles to take out anti air systems and the rest are duds (to saturate defenses) or carry a payload for kamikaze to hit the actual target. The plane loiters outside enemy range while dropping 100 to 500 drones. Thing is, drones don't need a large platform. You can even easily convert a small attack submarine to a subsurface drone carrier if you like.
Honestly the place my brain went is weirdly the old blimp carrier concept from the inter-war period. Like I wonder if it could be adapted to work with drones, maybe with modern materials and tech it could solve the core issues of it being weirdly uncontrollable and the planes breaking themselves and the blimp when trying to "land".
Exactly! I actually started with sci fy, alien motherships releasing clouds of fighter as my inspiration. Then quickly headed to those weird blimp concepts.
Not only can modern technology solve the problems but suicide drones can be folded to pack more in and you don’t have to worry about them coming back, unlike manned fighters. Treat them more like ammunition, smart and slow ammunition
They are already working on it. Old Zeppelin hangars have been facelift and new ones have been built and in secret they are re-developping them to be drone and control platforms. I don't know why, they stopped using and developing them because they are highly unpredictable and dangerous in heavy winds.
Blimps and Zeplins were heavily limited by the tech of their time materials were heavy and hard to use for example I know damned well the blimps built here in SoCal used leather gaskets. It's possible to compensate for some of the instability with more modern props and battery tech.
Also if shit keeps going how it is we may need a couple modernized designs due to resource shortages, hydrogen can be sourced locally jet fuel not so much.
Even modern day designs have one major flaw: they can't operate in wind. But rest assured, next to that major flaw there are many other flaw as well.
Honestly I just like dirigibles so if they want to bash their heads against walls and build new ones I'll be happy.
I couldn't care less, as long as they don't use hydrogen but helium when they fly over my house.
But from what I've heard from avionic engineers and specialists it's just stupid. But tell that to startups who got a motherload of money from the government consisting of idiots who pull the government's wallet after seeing a 10min presentation which is basically a poorly produced animation video.
Y'know I fucking hate startups simply because they seem to just exist to waste time and money. Doing some fucky R&D for old tech is fine and can be interesting since sometimes someone finds something new to correct old issues, but as soon as a startup gets involved it basically instantly turns into a boondoggle. This is the type of shit that should be left to the Skunkworks and borderline redneck R&D labs in towns you've never heard of not some dipshit who thinks innovation means slapping LEDs on everything.
Hey, I have a great idea for transportation! Pods!
every startup these days.
Always a bunch of tech bro's who want to reinvent the train but worse, made an animation of it and somehow manage to hoard in millions for just a dumb concept which would never work.