A lot gets said about “destroying expensive equipment with cheap equipment” but Ukraine has deployed the “cheap drones” by the thousands just for a handful to get through. It does seem to be a strategy that works but it’s not exactly “we only spent $500 to kill a bazillion-dollar heli”.
Even at a hit rate of one in ten, which is on the lower end of plausible, drones are still very good value. Even if you take ten drones to kill one soldier that is still cheaper than the thousands of rounds of rifle ammo or hundreds of artillery shells it would normally take.
Even with 500 a piece and 1000 drones, they would have 0.5 vs 16
Yeah - I’m absolutely sure it’s still lower-cost in the long run. Also easier to produce “at scale” so the math works in the end.
Where do you get those numbers from? That they send 1’000s and only a handful get through? They post 100s of direct hit videos daily, which would equate to 100’000s getting launched daily.
The point is just that if we want to draw a conclusion about asymmetry of costs, we can’t count only the ones that have this outsized impact, but all that are produced.
No one has the exact numbers. So all we can say is that the score is not $500/$15B
OMG the internet… I’m clearly speaking informally. Or do you think a “bazillion” is a real number?
Mate, I’m gonna agree with the other guy here.
Your statements diminish the efforts and successes of the Ukrainian military, both by greatly exaggerating the amount of drones they use to land a successful strike and by mocking the reported 16 million number with your “bazillion”. The 16 million number is imo a completely believable amount.
They also simply did destroy a helicopter with a single drone. So the reporting is factual.
Everyone knows that many drones miss their target or get intercepted, just like bullets do. If a warthog destroys an armoured vehicle, we also report that the warthog destroyed the armoured vehicle and not that the majority of the bullets simply hit the ground next to the vehicle.
Your statements diminish the efforts and successes of the Ukrainian military,
I mean - they don’t. They’re clearly having great success. I said that they have a strategy that works. You just want somebody to argue against. Argue against somebody who disagrees.
LOL, yes they do. They’re straw man arguments even:
Most drones miss their target but some make a successful hit —> “thousands of drones for a handful of hits”
1 FPV drone vs a 16 million dollar helicopter —> “$500 drone vs bazillion-dollar helicopter”
I’m not saying you disagree that their strategy is successful, but your attempt at “putting things into perspective” are over exaggerated and diminishes the actual successes.
Also: you don’t know me, so please don’t tell me what it is that I want :)
I’m not saying you disagree that their strategy is successful, but your attempt at “putting things into perspective” are over exaggerated and diminishes the actual successes.
Of course it’s an exaggerated statement genius - a gazillion is a a pretty dead fucking giveaway n’est pas? But the constant cheer online of destroying “expensive” equipment with “cheap weapons” is not as clear as some people are making it out to be. “A lot” of drones are just destroyed.
I’m not diminishing shit. I’m pointing out reality.
No, “genius”, you’re building straw man’s.
And you completely ignored what I said and tried to be obtuse just because you… how did you put it? “want to argue”.
I’m simply calling you on your bullshit. I don’t need you to agree to being called on your bullshit to be correct.
