China builds first dedicated drone carrier

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2024/05/china-builds-worlds-first-dedicated-drone-carrier/

by ulrischa • 2 years ago

66 61 2 years ago

navalnews.com

RecycledEle2• 2 years ago

When I suggested aircraft carriers dedicated to drones around 2000, I was told it was absurd.

I was right.

prepend• 2 years ago

If only President Clinton had listened to you.

RecycledEle2• 2 years ago

It was not POTUS that rejected my ideas. It was DARPA-funded researchers at a university I worked at.

thefounder2• 2 years ago

Well I knew that in 1998, immediately after playing StarCraft with Protoss. Too bad I didn’t have the right connection s to sell this precious information to the U.S army

sshine• 2 years ago

I came to the comment section for this comment.

bethekind• 2 years ago

Are drones like the reaper easier and cheaper to maintain than normal planes like the f-35?

I could easily see USA releasing hybrid ships, with a few jets, but lots of drones

nradov6• 2 years ago

Yes, the MQ-9 Reaper is much easier and cheaper to maintain than an F-35. However, there is a huge capability gap to the extent that a Reaper simply can't do many missions at all. It isn't survivable for penetrating strikes, is vulnerable to communications link disruption, lacks an air search radar, can't defend itself against enemy aircraft, flies slower, has a much lower payload, can't do air refueling, can't carry nuclear weapons, etc. It is possible in principle the build a drone with capabilities similar to an F-35 but then it would be almost as expensive to maintain.

Having some drone carriers is probably a good idea. They could take over from supercarriers for limited missions, like striking insurgent targets in Yemen. That would be a lot cheaper. LHD class ships could be deployed with an air wing composed of a mix of F-35B jets plus various drones.

Dalewyn4• 2 years ago

On the other hand, a drone doesn't need to be survivable. If a drone is shot down then all that's lost is a few million tax dollars, unlike a pilot or two if an F-35 or F/A-18 goes down. Drones are an expendable and consumable commodity.

A drone designed for aerial combat and dogfighting would also be inherently faster than any manned fighter. It doesn't need to account for the biological limitations of the pilot(s) which are far below the physical limitations of a fighter.

With regards to lack of self-sufficiency, no proficiency at aerial tasks (eg: refueling), et al., that's a question of when they will be satisfactorily solved given the continuing advances in computing power and the programs that execute on them.

halJordan2• 2 years ago

The reaper was itself replaced in much the same manner at about the same time as when the f35 replaced the f16. An f-35 is still cheaper than an rq-170 or 180, which would be the better comparison

thriftwy3• 2 years ago

I was thinking, what if Shahed had 10 Lancets to be activated somewhere around the route instead of a single explosive payload? Then it could strike several armoured vehicles at once, deep into the enemy ranks.

zmmmmm• 2 years ago

it's hard not to forsee a future where entire wars are fought by sending millions of drones at each other. I can't decide if it's a dystopian nightmare or a much better thing than having humans slaughter each other. It's sort of the ultimate conversion of physical war to economic. The side that runs out of money to make more or better drones first will be the loser.

Probably optimistic though. I guess each side will always know that humans are the high value targets and that will dictate that whatever else happens they will still target them even if a proxy-war is being fought by the drones.

thriftwy3• 2 years ago

You also need men to actually hold any land. The best you can do with drones is turning enemy territory into grey zone.

endofreach• 2 years ago

You also need men to actually hold any land

*and women

csomar2• 2 years ago

I guess each side will always know that humans are the high value targets and that will dictate that whatever else happens they will still target them even if a proxy-war is being fought by the drones.

Humans are more of an emotional target. Some humans are a high value target, but most are not. It's more valuable to target an oil refinery, an airport or a strategic bridge.

The next war will boil down to math. AI powered drones where intelligence and strategy will determine the fate of the war. That is until the other party decide to blow the whole thing with nuclear weapons.

imoverclocked• 2 years ago

Humans are more of an emotional target. Some humans are a high value target, but most are not.

Tell that to Nagasaki or Hiroshima. Also, tell that to Ukraine.

Humans will always be targets at least somewhat; If for nothing else, they are near the controls to some drone. Warfare is psychological at least as much as it is physical.

kiba2• 2 years ago

The next war will boil down to math. AI powered drones where intelligence and strategy will determine the fate of the war.

AI powered drones are useless without the logistics and manufacturing base which they came from. They also cannot take land, because they're drones, not infantry killbots. They also lack the attribute and strength of tube artillery, rockets, fighter planes, etc.

It's also missing the dimensions of counter such as direct energy weapons, SHORADs, electronic warfare, etc. Drones are prominent now because counters hadn't been sufficiently developed or widely deployed.

Also, we don't know when the next war will erupt. 1 year? 5 year? 10 year? It's quite bold to make such prediction.

rasz2• 2 years ago

Humans are more of an emotional target. Some humans are a high value target, but most are not

Only using western $military spending$ numbers, like $10K switchblade-300 or those ridiculous $90K Rogue https://www.twz.com/air/rogue-1-is-one-of-the-marine-corps-n... https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/1colzqq...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/12/04/some-o...

Ukraine calculated that at $500-1000 per fpv kill they can deplete all russian able bodies without breaking $10 Billion, something inconceivable to NATO armies.

0x0203• 2 years ago

While a common sentiment, I think this concept misses the entire purpose of war. The purpose of any war is to impose your will by force on another, and by extension, prevent your enemy from imposing his. A drone-on-drone war may be an opening salvo, but unless drones are the only means available to an aggressor or defender, they will never be the only means being used in warfare no matter how technologically advanced things become. As long as an enemy has the will and capacity to resist force upon him, or still has the ability to impose his will by force on another, the war will continue. Once enough of one side's drones or robots are sufficiently defeated, it will be people that are the means for imposing or resisting force, so they will eventually always be the ones fighting and dying.

I can't imagine if Ukrainians had incredibly advanced drone/robot tech, them throwing all their drones at the Russians, loosing them all, and then saying 'Well, we used up all our drones, I guess we'll give up now.' It always comes down to removing an enemy's capacity or will to resist force, and people will always be part of that equation.

Dalewyn4• 2 years ago

While a common sentiment, I think this concept misses the entire purpose of war. The purpose of any war is to impose your will by force on another, and by extension, prevent your enemy from imposing his.

More fundamentally, war is just another facet of diplomacy.

It's commonly said that diplomacy has failed when wars are waged, but actually wars are merely the act of last resort in diplomacy and diplomacy itself is perfectly fine.

pophenat• 2 years ago

If drone armies are vastly more powerful than human armies, the latter become insignificant much like unarmed civilians are irrelevant in a war today. If Ukraine loses its army, it will surrender. If an army of the future loses its drones it will be impossible to oppose the winner’s drones and would surrender as well.

redandblack• 2 years ago

It will help non-state actors wage the asymmetric war and impose costs.

Think Houthis, they may in few years drive sea/air drones with small load munitions - operating far from the site, and statistically be lucky to make their point

It will not be limited to them either - pick a place that have people who think they are oppressed and live in the margins, and really have not a whole lot at stake to worry

Intralexical3• 2 years ago

Once enough of one side's drones or robots are sufficiently defeated, it will be people that are the means for imposing or resisting force, so they will eventually always be the ones fighting and dying.

If your people are better at building drones than fighting in person, then presumably the enemy's drones will already be in your cities before it makes sense to send people to stop them.

The purpose of any war is to impose your will by force on another… …It always comes down to removing an enemy's capacity or will to resist force, and people will always be part of that equation.

People are the quarry. That doesn't mean that the physical means to resist force will always be in the hands of people.

It might also mean an initial attritional phase where machines kill machines, followed by a very brief and very lethal series of machine-directed killings in all your metropolitan areas, as soon as one side runs out of drones and drone-producing factories.

rasz2• 2 years ago

I can't imagine if Ukrainians had incredibly advanced drone/robot tech,

sufficiently advanced for supply disruption

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cse...

and profit denial, something international sanctions seems to have failed to accomplish, here 1400km away from border:

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cns...

them throwing all their drones at the Russians, loosing them all

'losing' by blowing stuff up

and then saying 'Well, we used up all our drones, I guess we'll give up now.'

is that what you see here (NSFW):

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cuq...

are 20 burned russian bodies Ukrainian way of saying 'I guess we'll give up now'? Drones enabled $500-1000 kills, the cheapest way to erase enemy manpower ever achieved.

This is typical ru trench run

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cth...

and mopping up leftovers

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cum...

kiba2• 2 years ago

You are misunderstanding the nature of war. Drones, much like aircraft can't take ground. Infantry can, other ground units such as tanks and AFV helps assists in that.

For sure, drones will be a new element in warfare, but as like units in strategy video games, they have weakness and strength. Although unlike strategy games, reality doesn't care about balance.

wood_spirit• 2 years ago

When we say “drone” we often think of aircraft, but there are done ships and drone vehicles too.

The Ukrainian drone boats have been very successfully waging an asymmetric war in the Black Sea.

Drone ground vehicle development is mostly around demining, logistics and casualty evacuation. But there have been some old tanks laden with explosives used as breaches.

defrost• 2 years ago

    China has built the world's first dedicated drone carrier. The ship has not been reported however and many of the circumstances surrounding it remain a mystery.

I'm pretty sure it was Naval News that reported on this carrier some six to nine months ago and linked to a youtube video showing the carrier and coordinated marine drone swarms.

Whichever source it was, the article I read and the youtube were pulled in less than 24 hours and the links I saved (on my other office machine, not to hand ATM) were dead.

China developing such things is no surprise, the US military PR side choosing to report then not report for another six months is just as interesting.

wonderwonder3• 2 years ago

We are rapidly moving towards the science fiction reality of a large plane flying over a city and dropping thousands of small, cheap, autonomous drones. The drones just hunt down all life. Then you just keep the city, infrastructure and all.

Intralexical3• 2 years ago

How would these drones deal with people who reside inside buildings which have physically enclosed interior spaces, such as houses, apartments, tenements, or large sheds and tents?

themadturk3• 2 years ago

Unless special preparations are made, city-dwellers have to come out sometime, don't they?

wonderwonder3• 2 years ago

One suicide explosive drone opens a hole, the next goes into it.

shostack• 2 years ago

When you think about Russia and China and not adhering to international law, you could imagine a total war scenario where they use chemical and biological weapons to do just this. Imagine a drone force deploying over a city at night, dispersing the agents into the air and water. People would never know what hit them.

FabHK• 2 years ago

Somewhat related entertaining book recommendation (sci-fi thriller): Kill Decision by Daniel Suarez (from 2012).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Decision

krasin• 2 years ago

From the same author, I can recommend "Daemon", "Freedom" and "Delta-V" (the first book). Just stay away from "Delta-V" book 2. :)

jacknews• 2 years ago

"Only China can build an aircraft carrier in relative secrecy."

Well if this is indeed supposed to mimic opposition forces, then China knows something that's supposed to be a secret, and the above statement is not (quite) true.

Ajay-p• 2 years ago

Feels like the book Kill Decision by Daniel Suarez.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Decision

China builds first dedicated drone carrier

Related Stories