US Air Force Orders Anti-Drone Net-Filled Shotgun Shells

[allardjd 1,853]

US Air Force Orders Anti-Drone Net-Filled Shotgun Shells

 

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/03/14/us-air-force-orders-anti-drone-net-filled-shotgun-shells.html

 

The article indicates they are for evaluation - not being put into general use by the USAF (yet), but they are commercially available and are being made in 12 ga. and 40 mm sizes.

 

It's not a bad idea but I suspect range is pretty limited.  It's not really a net, more of a 5-string bolo, but is probably pretty effective against a quadracopter with exposed rotor blades.  If the blades are shrouded, not so sure how well it will work.

 

The weight must be negligible so if it doesn't foul the rotors and doesn't include a tether, chances are it won't work very well.

 

John

[brett 2,301]

Yeah, can't see them traveling that far and why do the police need them anyway. I can see certain military application needs but not the fact that they couldn't use any number of other weapons to shoot it down and still be able to inspect it. They just love to waste our money and will use any number of reasons to test new products, those reasons are not always in parallel with what they first state.

 

Let's keep in mind that here in the US it is not illegal to record the police although they will say it is to protect themselves in case they do something stupid.

[allardjd 1,853]

I think the most pressing issue for the police is the use of drones to drop contraband (drugs, weapons, etc.) into prison and jail yards - apparently it's not all that uncommon these days.  

 

Also, drone surveillance of those facilities can compromise security procedures/features that they might not want to be publicly available.  I know at the nuclear plant, literally the ONLY documents that were treated as "classified" and had to be kept locked up and only made available for those with a "need to know" where those dealing with security.  How you do security is generally considered to be something that should be closely held.

 

John

[brett 2,301]

All criminals, fly at 500' https://www.lesslethal.com/component/edocman/?task=document.viewdoc&id=11&Itemid 

 

Kidding aside they would be better of pointing an electronic interference device at it.

[dodgy-alan 1,587]

We have a big problem with drones supplying prisons over here as well. The trouble is now that the things are so common it's impossible to control them. They are supposed to be licensed and recorded but of course only law abiding operators do that, the rest of them don't bother and that's the problem. The prices have come down to silly levels so that even kids can buy them. The genie has been let out of the bottle, and it's not going back any time soon. All it needs is some clown to fly one into a sensitive area like Buckingham Palace, Windsor castle, The White House etc whilst carrying explosives and heavens knows what would happen. Some of the new drones being developed are so small that they are almost undetectable. It is a very worrying development and I fear things will come to a head in tragic circumstances in the near future.

 

[allardjd 1,853]

I suspect the White House, Buckingham Place and Windsor Castle probably are all over this already, most likely electronically.  

 

The tiny drones are not much of a physical threat but some of them can live-stream and/or record video and audio and as such are an espionage threat in sensitive places.  Those big enough to carry a lethal payload of explosives are going to be a little larger, of course, and hopefully easier to detect and defeat.  It would be great to be able to insert a rogue program into their little brain on the fly, 1) Go Home, 2) Detonate.

 

I forgot to mention cell phones as a popular item of contraband in jails and prisons here, along with the drugs and weapons, which I did mention.  I suspect it's the same over there.

 

John

[dodgy-alan 1,587]

The cellphone and drug delivery drones are a massive problem over here now. short of having guns on the outsides of prisons there's not a lot they can do about them at the moment.

 

[Captain Coffee 2,030]

How many drone frequencies are there? Seems like it should be possible, like with RC airplanes, to turn on a more powerful transmitter at the prison, or wherever, and overpower the users transmitter.

[allardjd 1,853]

Basics of Radio Frequencies for FPV Quadcopter Drones

 

http://www.droneflyers.com/basics-radio-frequencies-fpv-quadcopter-drones/

 

Some good info here, but I think that the reference to 2.4 GHz really means a band of frequencies in that general vicinity on the RF spectrum.  I'm not really sure how that band is sliced and diced.   Note that is also a common band for  wireless networks. 

 

There are a number of ways to limit interference and help assure that TX and RX are in communications with each other and no others, but none of them are foolproof and any of them can be jammed by a stronger signal.  It's doubtful that any of these things use anything fancy like frequncy-hopping or encoded commands, at least not yet.

 

Bottom line - jamming is probably possible but might also cause interference with other, innocent wireless devices nearby.  

 

I think some jails are now stretching nets over exercise yards to prevent contraband being dropped in.  

 

John

[brett 2,301]

I think they might have a better chance with this piece of work instead, has a longer range and would be easier to 'hit' the target.

 

http://makezine.com/2015/10/16/research-company-takes-aim-uavs-portable-anti-drone-rifle/

[allardjd 1,853]

I saw an article recently that one of our "customer countries" which wasn't named, used a $3M Patriot missile to down a $200 commercial drone.  Sounds like overkill to me.  It makes Iron Dome, the Israeli anti-rocket, anti-mortar shell missile, at about $10K a pop, sound downright cheap.

 

John

[Captain Coffee 2,030]

4 hours ago, allardjd said:

I saw an article recently that one of our "customer countries" which wasn't named, used a $3M Patriot missile to down a $200 commercial drone.  Sounds like overkill to me.  It makes Iron Dome, the Israeli anti-rocket, anti-mortar shell missile, at about $10K a pop, sound downright cheap.

 

John

 

I saw that as well. I sorta hope on a fiscal level that it was fake news, but on the other hand...it's also sorta useful info to know that if really necc, a missile could take one of those little mites out. As people get cleverer using those things, you just never know where or when it could be a "all we got available" solution.

 

@Brett, that is more like what I was thinking, come kind of focused beam device to run through drone freq's till it senses a lock onto the drone, then "take it", or break it...heh.

Edited March 17, 2017 by Captain Coffee

[allardjd 1,853]

I suspect that eventually, directed energy devices, e.g. lasers, will become the preferred defense.  Interfering with the RF is all well and good as far as it goes, but doesn't provide any defense against an autonomous drone, pre-programmed to drop something, record something or attack something.  

 

In more sophisticated drones, advanced measures like frequency-hopping, satellite-based control, or semi-autonomous control schemes will make them a lot more immune to garden variety jamming.  That won't be the case with the cheaper, off-the-shelf consumer versions for some time yet, but those used by governments or well-financed terrorists, for instance, probably won't be so easily affected by jamming.

 

John

[allardjd 1,853]

"Army to get laser that can zap drones..."

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/03/16/lockheed-martin-says-it-is-ready-to-hand-over-laser-weapon-to-u-s-army-for-testing/?utm_term=.9397a252ea9c

[J G 927]

All a bit hi-tech and expensive for me.  What is wrong with bird shot? it will bring a bird down, it will bring a plastic whirly thing down.  Cheap as chips and it would be fun watching bits of plastic leaving the drone that really were not designed to do so.

[Captain Coffee 2,030]

Well, capturing an intact drone is potentially preferable...for instance if a neer'dowell were flying a suspected chemical weapon to a target, dispersing the agent with a shotgun shell over populated areas might be a bad idea...and one would have to take wind dispersal into factor when shooting it down for the shooter's sake as well.

I doubt that netting a drone in that case would be good either, the package could break during the fall.

 

I think large anti-drone drones carrying nets slung underneath to snag smaller drones is a potentially good way to go. They could pluck targets out of the air and land them safely and softly in a secured area.

 

And think of all the Anti-Drone drone pilot jobs it could create

 

 

Edited March 18, 2017 by Captain Coffee

[brett 2,301]

They should just train falcons to attack them.