159
STING once again proves its effectiveness πͺ
As you can see, completely different weight categories, but thanks to this our interceptor drone defeats much larger opponents.
It is light and maneuverable, which allows it to effectively neutralize enemy equipment.
The average effectiveness of STING is 70% successful interceptions.
Since the drone has been in use β thousands of lives saved and hundreds of intercepted targets. This is a result we are proud of, and which our military improve every day. All thanks to them!
Glory to Ukraine πΊπ¦
I know it's probably huge, but what's the cost difference?
About 15x.
My gut said no way that was true so I looked it up and was surprised to learn that Shaheds are only around 35k. I guessed 50-100k
I see Stings are reported to cost 1-5k. Unless the motors are $500 each (it's possible), I'm guessing it's closer to the low end so the math checks out
Woukd nice if they could separate rear end with motors and electronics just before impact and recover and reuse
I think that would significantly impact the cost. To be far enough away to survive the explosion would require some sort of guidance system on the payload and the "parent" drone would need to be beefed up for the extra weight (from the added electronics and the battery to power the return flight.
I know they experimented with carrying a bunch of the DIY quads on large octocopters but I think they pivoted away from that
A fixed wing carrier makes a lot more sense. They can loiter/glide at higher altitudes for days.
Yeah, but even then I think it'd be hard to justify. You'd only need a fixed wing for distant targets and it's probably cheaper to just increase the battery capacity on the stingers themselves
I think either way there'd be signal and latency issues at that range. Not a problem for fixed wings because they fly more predictably but quads are required more active piloting so signal loss can really screw you