site banner
PaperclipPerfector  11mo ago (text post)   3958 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for November 26, 2023

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Question for any war nerds: why are dummy drones and dummy vehicles not being used in Ukraine? Shouldn’t these be a feasible way of wasting enemy resources and determining their location?

Eg you dress up a shitty $500 plastic RC to look like a tank and you attach it with a $100 speaker to sound like a tank; enemy wastes a MANPAD and more importantly a hidden drone overhead can see where attack was launched from. Eg you create a larger / more visible drone with no payload on it and wait for enemy to fire at it.

I also don’t understand why “sound warfare” tactics aren’t being used. I saw a drone video from a few days ago where a tank shoots into a building a dozen times before leaving; 30min later Ukrainians pop out and retreat from their fortified position. The tank was ineffective at hitting them and inefficient at causing them to flee, but dropping a bunch of extremely loud screeching and beeping “speakers” above their position would be unbearable and force them to retreat. Annoying sounds were used in American torture programs for a reason.

Lastly is there any cost effective way to introduce a “Chinese stratosphere balloon” strategy? It takes expensive weapons to shoot down but you can fly nine dummies and one payload over Kiev and then just drop a bunch of small munitions, or no?

They do use decoys, but you’re not going to fool your modern drone operators. They usually use two drones, one for observation and one for the attack. It’s unlikely that after observation at >720p for a few minutes that anyone bar the drunkest Russian would be fooled.

Annoying sounds are great for torturing people who can't stop you. They're less relevant on the battlefield.

Eg you create a larger / more visible drone with no payload on it and wait for enemy to fire at it.

Wasn't that more or less how Moskva was sunk? They sent a drone to its seaward side that drew the attention of its CIWS and hit it with an anti-ship missile while it was distracted.

I don’t know what anti-tank weapons are used in this conflict, but modern ones include things like infrared sights. Even a purely visual system can be enough for the operator to decide that it’s a fake! But yes, it’s useful enough for people to try it.

Armies have played around with sonic weapons for ages, but you still have to overcome the standard defense: earplugs. Which are standard issue for troops operating firearms. I’m sure it’s possible to cause injury or discomfort anyway, but at a certain point, why not use normal explosives? The standard US frag grenade can be thrown like a baseball, costs $45 to make and will injure anyone within 49 feet. I don’t know that you can make a sonic weapon more efficient than that.

Finally, a saturation attack with balloons is possible, but I wouldn’t expect it to be efficient. You’ll have a hell of a time hitting any specific target from a drifting platform. Get low enough to have any precision, and you’re back to normal rifle or at least helicopter range!

Question for any war nerds: why are dummy drones and dummy vehicles not being used in Ukraine? Shouldn’t these be a feasible way of wasting enemy resources and determining their location?

I was under the impression that both sides use decoys, yes?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-decoy-himars-launchers-entice-russian-missile-strikes

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/tu-95-decoys-are-being-painted-on-russian-air-bases-apron

Yes, inflatable/blow-up decoys are used massively and are rumored to be the source of the comical Russian reports of destroying more of a particular system or type of armament that existed in reality. It's not that Russians just invented it - somebody likely destroyed a decoy and reported about it upstream, where the figures are aggregated, only they destroyed a cheap wooden box or balloon. Most hits aren't easy to conform and also the low level soldiers have low incentive to do it - who wants to turn from a hero who destroyed a million-dollar American war machine to a doofus that spent expensive ammunition on blowing up a cheap painted balloon? There are numerous interviews online with manufacturers of these decoys, some of them look pretty convincing on video. Russians seem to be catching up on the game too, so I expect by now it happens on both sides with some frequency.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats