Shooting down cheap drones not cost effective for US Navy

[Slater]

You pretty much have to run what you brung until some other systems can be brought to bear.

"The cost of using expensive naval missiles — which can run up to $2.1 million a shot — to destroy unsophisticated Houthi drones — estimated at a few thousand dollars each — is a growing concern, according to three other DOD officials. The officials, like others interviewed for this story, were granted anonymity to describe sensitive operations and internal deliberations.

“The cost offset is not on our side,” said one DOD official.

Experts say this is an issue that needs to be addressed, and urge DOD to start looking at lower-cost options for air defense.

“That quickly becomes a problem because the most benefit, even if we do shoot down their incoming missiles and drones, is in their favor,” said Mick Mulroy, a former DOD official and CIA officer. “We, the U.S., need to start looking at systems that can defeat these that are more in line with the costs they are expending to attack us.”


https://www.yahoo.com/news/2m-missil...190000271.html

[hotbiggun42]

How would they defend themselves if there were 1000 drones?

[SteyrAUG]

edited

[hotbiggun42]

Thank you SteyrAUG

[flenna]

The most effective response would be for the USN to vaporize the drone launch sites as soon as they are detected.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Lazers, even sharks with lasers.

I agree that designing future platforms to accommodate the low tech risk is appropriate. But, this smells like some Biden DOD official lamenting the expenditure of money when it is well known that our current ordnance capabilities have been depleted. Pissing and moaning that a US warship is spending too much money protecting itself and accomplishing the task at hand is bullshit.

Uhm, pretty sure it isn't a money thing. First off its a magazine/cell thing, then it is a global supply of missles thing. You can 3d print and put an Aurdino board with some c4 and make something that would wreck havoc on the topsides of our aluminum cans. Maybe $15k per killer drone. The dollars are more just a representation of how many there could be.

The solution is anti-drone drone swarms.

The gold-plated defense-contractor dream weapon systems designed to add every capability for every dime to sink the Kirov and hold back Backfire bombers is going to get its ass handed to it by 3D printed drones for pennies on the dollar.

Where are all this pieces-of-crap 'targets' that where cLittoral boats? Let those take the hits.

[LoboTBL]

The most effective response would be for the USN to vaporize the drone launch sites as soon as they are detected.

This. This right here. Then start on suspected drone launch sites.

[glocktogo]

The most effective response would be for the USN to vaporize the drone launch sites as soon as they are detected.

That would require someone in the Biden Administration to actually have a set of balls. They don’t have a single nut between them.

[SteyrAUG]

The most effective response would be for the USN to vaporize the drone launch sites as soon as they are detected.

Oh to dream.

[chuckman]

How would they defend themselves if there were 1000 drones?

So the bean counters want to control front line decisions and put at risk US personnel? History is circular.

It's a legit question and issue: do you really need a $N dollar missile to take out a $Y dollar drone, and how cost effective is it when they have 1,000 drones to your 50 missiles? There can be, should be better and more cost-effective ways, Of course, like others, I advocate taking out launch sites. Don't need to shoot drones out of the skies if there are no launch sites for drones.

It isn't hard to spend an enemy over the cliff.

Saddam was doing that, he'd threaten the US and we'd start ramping up a US response and then he'd stop being a threat. But the effort still cost the US military millions of dollars. That was the point.

In this instance, low cost drones can quickly raise the cost of defensive operations into multi million dollar amounts. I don't think this is a case of bean counters not wanting to protect lives but the realization that we need a more cost effective solution to the problem. Not everything needs a super sophisticated high tech solution, especially low tech threats.

Those 2 million dollar missiles were designed to deal with things like enemy fighters and incoming missiles.

We did it with japan in WW2, we did it with the Soviets during the Cold War. but it does come ata very real cost (no pun intended).