Hacker News Reader

Comment by YZF | Hacker News Reader

I think many are trying something along these lines. The devil is in the details.

The shotgun needs to be reloaded. The system needs to be reasonably reliable and durable. Feels like the range of the shotgun is also a problem. The system needs to have some sort of friend vs. foe identification, possibly not shoot at birds or other random objects. The camera needs to be able to deal with looking at the sun and low light, day and night, likely needs to be able to scan. Pretty soon you get to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS

View on HN

> The shotgun needs to be reloaded.

Eventually, certainly, but you can put it off for a while without much trouble.

You can get 20 round drum magazines for 12 gauge shotguns, and keep hot-swapping 'em until your barrel overheats.

> Phalanx_CIWS

But that's 1980 technology. I bet a current GPU could outcompute it by orders of magnitude.

Range is definitely an issue with shotguns. On the other hand, you're dealing with low-speed drones, not enemy missiles.

My point was once you start adapting to all the requirements you inevitably end up with a more complex system. Another thing that happens in a war is that the enemy will adapt to what you're doing.

The principles are fine (well, not sure camera is the right only sensor but aside). The actual engineering of a working system you can use in real life is complicated and that's what many are working on.

I just came back from a walk and someone was flying a drone. Those things are fast, small, highly maneuverable.

A Phalanx_CWIS is overkill. Also, I suspected that the system received continuous upgrades throughout the decades.

Likewise, the Abrams tanks are cold war era tanks, but they are continuously upgraded that a modern Abrams tank isn't really a 1980 tank. Modernization is likely to remove some weight and make Abrams more survivable against drones, in response to the Russo-Ukrainian war;

Reply on news.ycombinator.com