Love it. Think I'll call it Bob.

Loitering munition should be cheap, sturdy , easily manufactured and a disposable weapon. PHOLOS does not look cheap. It looks fragile in crosswind. It is slow thus easily targeted by groundfire.

im getting no sound on any device

@rats2864

10 ай бұрын

Pretty sure this video just doesn't have sound

@danhodson7187

10 ай бұрын

It did say ultra low noise signature 😂

What’s the naval potential use case?

@neilsanghvi5229

10 ай бұрын

I'm guessing mine insertion, sonar buoy deployment, chaff dispersal, helicopter decoy, signal booster for low visibility carrier landings, small item unrep, etc.

Never forget history. The Brits lead the way and the rest just follow, especially the Yanks!

@andrewpease3688

10 ай бұрын

Actually it is American

@Retrosicotte

4 ай бұрын

@@andrewpease3688Nope, Pholos is British.

@andrewpease3688

4 ай бұрын

@@Retrosicotte no it’s not,actually look it up before commenting.It’s said to be joint UK/USA , but I’m sceptical about even that

@Retrosicotte

4 ай бұрын

@@andrewpease3688Incorrect. It states it very clearly on the manufacturer's website. "Designed AND built in Britain".

@andrewpease3688

4 ай бұрын

@@Retrosicotte I didn’t see exactly that,but I did see some shifty language.Check out ascent AeroSystems and Czech defence systems “PHOLOS” which they state was a “joint development”.The UK defence sector is full of chancers disguising foreign equipment.Take the jackal UAV for example,actually developed in Turkey

Whilst undoubtedly useful capability, it will be spotted on the battlefield and shot at by heavy machine gun (and soon enough more precision based anti-drone capability). However, Ukraine has demonstrated that using grenades combined with commercial drones can do the same thing, almost as well, as a fraction of the cost Would it not make more sense to focus on air deployable drone with encrypted comms and a better aimed release mechanism for slightly better weapons ?

@deadbeats7604

10 ай бұрын

These are much heavier payloads with greater distance so far more useful than small drones with grenades attached.

@vincentvoncarnap2473

10 ай бұрын

it seems like they would work best at night, and are more against armored vehicles than tanks.

@nickbrough8335

10 ай бұрын

@@deadbeats7604 I’m not disputing that. But the main advantage to Drones is their disposability combined with the chance that they are reusable. A better aimed “bomb” with a shaped charge warhead may still be quite a bit less expensive and therefore more numerous. The defence sector (and the MoD) has a habit of over engineering and over thinking.

@colingoldthorpe5918

10 ай бұрын

@@nickbrough8335but a drone is only as accurate as the pilot… they were toying with a mortar round like this called “Merlin” that could differentiate between friend and foe tanks. And then strike them from above.

@nickbrough8335

10 ай бұрын

@@colingoldthorpe5918 I’m not disputing this is likely to be a very good weapon with superior attributes. It seems to me without an anti-drone system, if you can afford to send 20 cheap commercial drones at a tank for less than the cost of of of these, aren’t you likely to be loosing more equipment than you are destroying ?

Why do Ukraine have all these cool fast drones, and the UK has a slow hovering exploding salami?

But I believe that the kamikaze drones of the Ukrainian forces, which are for civilian use and have been modified, are more effective than this design.

At that speed it will make great target practice!!!🙄

@Nelsonwmj

10 ай бұрын

It's filmed in slow-mo.

No sound…..we are in the age of technology, put some pizzaz into it……you are on a media platform…..entertain me……why would I continue to watch this video……

@user-xj4ef5pv2d

4 ай бұрын

Because it's only 2 minutes long

End the military industrial complex