There is a lot of misunderstanding regarding the TB2 and it's philosophy. It is not a hyper-sophisticated, uber-expensive weapon system that wins wars. It is the Toyota Corolla of drones. It's not your favorite sports car. It is cheap, reliable, expandable, easy to operate / easy to maintain and will do 90% of your daily errands. Sure there are better drones such as the Global Hawks, Predators, Reapers or Wing Loongs, which are more than twice or three times the size (more easily detected and 5-7 times as costly). You can disassamble a TB2, move it with a flatbed truck, assemble it back, and take off from any road in 30 minutes. Try doing that with a Global Hawk. You wouldn't worry about losing a few TB2s in return of destroying your enemies morale, and supply columns. And the most damage is not caused by the TB2's micro munitions: the most damage is caused by ground artillery and rocket sytems which hit targets designated by the TB2. And if you want to hit a TB2 which can fly at 6-7000 meters altitude and fire weapons from 18 km which is beyond manpads or anti-aircraft gun territory, you need to shoot a very expensive medium-long range air defense missiles at it, more costly than the drone itself ! Yeah you can kill it, but you will go bankrupt doing that.
Another huge advantage of those lightweight drones: they don't need an airfield. A flat long road through someones farmland could do the job and the drones could be stored in a barn. Airfields are typical targets during war like we saw in Ukraine.
I mean prop planes where always making a comeback for that reason : jets are specialized machines that require careful maintenance and clean runways , Prop aircrafts are able to stay in a wherehouse and jump from a grassfield without any warning
I hadn't really thought of it that way, its interesting to think how effective drone pilots will become because if they mess up they are able to learn from the mistakes - where as if a fighter jet pilot messes up in combat - all that experience is lost often times
@@Taskandpurpose i love every time china and N.Korea releases a weapon it claims to be the best in the entire world like those 50% chips packets but its 50% more air
@@Bluehemi The problem with that, it encourages more war, causulties make war less palatable. "It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it." Robert E. Lee
@@Bluehemi So what if you destroy all drones and equipment of enemy? Will they surrender, i am very sure not. War is not between machines but people so in a war people are the target not the machines. Machines are important to be destroyed because people use them to kill more enemy then a single person with a fist. Humans will always be there on the battlefield no matter how great the technology advances.
One feature of TB2 is psychological pressure. An invisible weapon is hovering above you 24 hours a day and night, and you hear an unexpected whistle and you have only 7 seconds to escape. Imagine the deadly psychological pressure on soldiers in the field.
A big part you glossed over is this new war equipment economy. The US has routinely opted for ultra-high dollar equipment that is "the best" Things like the TB2 and the NLAW are proving the viability of weapon systems that are almost as good at a fraction of the price. Exploring this would be a great video topic.
The thing is though that tanks are being destroyed by 122 and 152mm shells and tb2s are doing great at recon. It takes a laughable amount of javelins ect to take down a tank (3 to 8 at the start of war, around 25 now)
@@mariuspretorius7913 It only takes 1 jav mate. It could only take so many if the users didn't know what they were doing, not letting the IR system cool down and thus inducing targeting errors and missing as a result.
2:10 That's not a TB1 it's an Akıncı; Tactical Armed Unmanned Arial Vehicle. It's closer to Global Hawk than a Predator. It's a Turkish unique concept for delivering havier payloads (I mean JDAM-sized ammo), air defense, radar coverage, and also for carrying cruise missiles for deep penetration operations.
yes exactly. and i like to make another correction. the reaper drone ist not the counterpart of the tb2. the reaper drone is way bigger and more expensive.
@@selcal1948 exactly. The TB2 is more closely related to the MQ-1 Predator based on size, range, loiter, and payload capacity. The Reaper has a much higher capacity, but lower loiter time.
To further add to your comment: 9:27 Chinese combat drones have garnered a horrible reputation actually. Existing users like Iraq and Turkmenistan have been switching away from it in favor of the TB2, and Nigeria is planning to do the same. In Libya, the UAE and Egypt used _Wing Loong 2_ drones on the side of warlord Khalifah Haftar (who's also backed by France and Russia) and they completely flopped against the _Bayraktar TB2_ used on the side of the Libyan government. 7:40 Turkey was the first to use a laser weapon in combat in August 2019 in Libya to shoot down a _Wing Loong 2_ drone. This is also why Turkish combat drones will continue to be resilient because they have sufficient experience with the counter technology. It's partly also why they've been effective against Russian defense systems because they're familiar with the technology since everyone in the region has been using them. People who hate on the TB2 conveniently leave out the fact that the TB2 is actually a lower-end drone in the Turkish drone portfolio. The _TAI Anka,_ the _Bayraktar Akinci,_ and _TAI Aksungur_ are far more advanced drones but they cost more. Baykar is also developing the _Bayraktar TB3_ and _Kizil-Elma_ drones. So comparing the TB2 with the Reaper and Heron drones make no sense.
@@realtalk6195 i think that mainly depends Cuz chinese drones have horrible rcs So they are easier to track Pakistan used wing loong II to destroy terrorist compounds in afghanistan and waziristan So they are useful for countries dealing with insurgents or terrorists Otherwise Western tech is better for dealing with militaries
A thing that you failed to mention about the TB2 is that because it's smaller that other drones of its type and constructed almost completely out of reinforced fiberglass, which gives it a very small radar signature, so it is hard to detect and accurately track.
looked like carbon fiber not fiberglass, but same idea & why they are hard to track. However, small drone similar size with a decent radar & m249 can be deployed over ground force afters (these fly for around 24hours, so possible to keep them in the air all the time) to search and destory these pest. RU cant afford it but US could until ground radar & lasers could take over some areas (limited as map of the earth flying gives radar blind spots). However, 5million each is costly - basically is a sports class plane (and same engine) which could be had for like $75,000 new plus maybe $150,000 in optics and $100,000k in radios/control and lets say $100,000 in racks/guns so no idea why they are 5mil each, 500k is reasonable excluding cost of mobile base stations ($500k each in a van or truck with an extendable dish like news vans) - simple PCs/screens, gen for power, and the radio/dish, a/c. Hell you could just make a simple smaller drone it 1-2 bombs at like $500k and do similar work and have 10x vs 1x 5mil one and have 10x results and be even harder to detect and shoot down. basically best version would be a larger switch blade US bomb-crash drone (think they are 50k each) but idk if the payload is enough on a tank (they are very small but my understanding is it can take one out if it hits the right spot) just make it large enough to use a small gas engine like 100cc engine so they can run on gas, have a bit larger of bomb integrated, and fly for 6hours & be able to land if no targets are foundand be re-used (likely would find a target in the 1st mission, but just incase make it well enough to do 2-3missions if needed at like 25k each (you know the switchblade likely cost maybe $5,000 to make but the company has to turn a profit) would shift a war with only like $10mil (400 of them) which is way cheaper then the billions in damages caused by war (ukraine is at like 8billion spent and 10x in lost of companies,buildings,people,etc
@@JohnAdams-qc2ju Software is important in such military vehicles. Even if you pick up all the pieces you've said and come up with something real, it's useless without software to dominate that hardware.
@@JohnAdams-qc2ju The Bulk of the cost is the software. On a drone nothing is more important than the software which runs it, it's also the software which separates how effective these things are on the battlefield.
Tracking has little to do with materials used and much more to do with the geometry of the craft. While carbon fiber and fiberglass is much less reflective than metal with the right geometry you can lower the radar signature by orders of magnitude
The Bayraktar TB2 is a good example of why it is good to pay attention to small/regional conflicts. @5:40 you will notice the Azerbaijani flag in the upper left hand corner. Azerbaijan used these to tremendous effect against mostly outdated Soviet/Russian equipment during the 2nd Karabakh War in Fall '20.
@@DroneStrike1776 " Only work when the enemy has no air space dominance. " bullcrappy on cappy channel. another tacticool genius spouting off his "knowledge". drones work even with russian air dominance - they are small and hard to notice on radar, both AAA and plane.
The image you show on 2:09 is not a bayraktar TB1, it is a Bayraktar Akinci, which is a newer, heavier and more advanced and expensive drone developed by the same company. Bayraktar TB1 was just the prototype for TB2.
To further add to your comment: 9:27 Chinese combat drones have garnered a horrible reputation. Existing users like Iraq and Turkmenistan have been switching away from it in favor of the TB2, and Nigeria is planning to do the same. In Libya, the UAE and Egypt used _Wing Loong 2_ drones on the side of warlord Khalifah Haftar (who's also backed by France and Russia) and they completely flopped against the _Bayraktar TB2_ used on the side of the Libyan government. 7:40 Turkey was the first to use a laser weapon in combat in August 2019 in Libya to take down a _Wing Loong 2_ drone. This is also why Turkish combat drones will continue to be resilient because they have sufficient experience with the counter technology. It's partly also why they've been effective against Russian defense systems because they're familiar with the technology since everyone in the region has been using them. People who hate on the TB2 conveniently leave out the fact that the TB2 is actually a lower-end drone in the Turkish drone portfolio. The _TAI Anka,_ the _Bayraktar Akinci,_ and _TAI Aksungur_ are far more advanced drones but they cost more. Baykar is also developing the _Bayraktar TB3_ and _Kizil-Elma_ drones. So comparing the TB2 with the Reaper and Heron drones make no sense.
Bruh they actually got a huge amount wrong here and even left out the biggest reason why Turkey pivoted to drone warfare so quickly in 2016, because that was the year Selçuk Bayraktar the CTO of Baykar Defence married Sumeyye Erdogan. Selçuk Bayraktar is the MIT educated millionaire architect of the Turkish Drone Programme. He was able to cut through military bureaucracy and red tape to supercharge Turkey's development and adoption of drone warfare because his father in law is literally the president of Turkey.
@@fludblud Well, that's not really going to be a focus of a video of military armaments. There's a lot of lobbying going on in the US and Euro weapons industries but these videos don't usually linger on it. Turkey began pivoting toward drone tech well before the TB2 or Selcuk marrying into the family, it really took off with the TAI Anka. Baykar were more efficient with thirs but they didn't start it, as that was already the plan in the works.
2:10 - it's not a Bayraktar TB1, it's Turkey's new Bayraktar Akinci drone. Also comparison between MQ-9 Reaper and Bayraktar TB2 is not valid, because those are different classes of drones, where TB2 is a small drone, that is mostly meant for recon with occasional high precision strikes, while Reaper is for strikes. The far better comparison for Reaper is the mentioned above drone, Akinci, because it is way more similar to Reaper in terms of size, payload capacity, range and its main purpose.
@@ismailmertcileci4199 agreed but the fact that the drones also can direct old munitions such artillery is also a force to recon with. I think its a brilliant asymetric warefare machine
Bayraktar is possibly the only drone which has actual battle field experience and is actually the only drone which has determined the course of a war (Armenian defeat ) . Now the updated version is much more lethal and practically unstoppable by current anti aircraft systems .
@@MINYASPB Mainly becuase its not stealthy and the Ukrainians are using it wrong, a drone is no fighter jet no matter which drone. They had lack of fighter jets and used TB2 instead, a drone cannot replace fighter jet.
tb2 has changed the outcome of two confilcts, the nogorno karabakh and libya conflicts. The kills of tb2 are well documented with video footage. Hundred if not thousands of tanks, armored vehicles, air defence systems, ew systems and radars...Even tb2 has shot down a large enemy cargo aircraft while it was closing in to airport.
The drone has proven itself to be honest. I first noticed them in the conflict in Libya. Where the did the impossible. Helping the GNA who almost lost the civil war, gaining more ground on the LNA. We saw the first vids circulating on the internet of this drone in action destroying Russian air defense systems. Which was totally insane to see. Then we saw them being used in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, were these drones also preformed great. Now in Ukraine, the even made a song about the drone. Strange to see how a country like Turkey because of some export ban turned into a drone power house out of the sudden. The impact of these small drones was huge. It played a major role in multiple bigger conflicts. I am pretty curious to see how the TB-3 will preform, which is also capable to land on an aircraft carrier. Which also will be pretty revolutionary.
How a country like Turkey? :) thats pitty and shame on you. We are not a lazy arab nor a calmy westerns. The point is these kind of high techs start up stopped somehow by politicians (you know who were feeding them). In 2005, Selçuk, the CTO of Baykar (tb2 manufacturer) said: when we try to make a field tests, the ministry always put excuses such as you cant perform bcs of the air traffic, we dont have plant, you dont have related regulation etc… now, there is no obstacles. I know, we are 3 world country, this is not a secret. Just imagine a country, there is always war in neighbours… iraq, syria, ukraine, armenia… idk where u are from, but just imagine then try to say again, how a country like turkey…
@@tahaosman791 Kardeşim hangi siyasetçilerden bahsediyorsun? Birileri tarafından yönlendiriliyor yazdın o yüzden sordum. Geri kalan kısım seninle aynı fikirdeyim.
@@borabora3506 spesifik isim söylemesine gerek yok. Atatürk öldüğünden beri satılmış amerikan köpekleri bu ülkenin yakasını bırakmadı. Aldıkları amerikan fonu için, para için ülkesini sattılar. Uçak imalatı yapıldı uçurulmadi, ihracatı engellendi kapatıldı. Roket yapıldı önü kesildi. Araba yapıldı önü kesildi. Her zaman satılmış birileri bu ülkenin ilerlemesini durdurdu. Yönetimleri kötü olsa da akp zamanında bu drone olayının önü açıldı destek olundu onu çok tebrik ediyorum.
You have to take into account that pretty much all drone kills are recorded with the onboard cameras, so you see a lot more video of them being effective compared to a group of guys just lobbing mortars into the rough area you know has enemy troops are. The drones are more accurate, so they look super impressive but they're expensive and only have 4 shots. A mortar team is cheap and inaccurate, but they can shoot 8-16 rounds per minute all day long.
Thank you for honestly saying that Turkey had to manufacture the drone itself, which it could not buy due to the embargo. As a NATO member country, I am still dealing with a lot of ridiculous embargoes. For example F35.. And the USA is increasingly supporting anti-Turkey groups, very interesting!?
@@xinjinpiig4062 Türkiye simply did not want to pay for and buy an air defense system. He wanted to buy an air defense system and modify it for his own interests. But the imperialist powers were compelled because they said no, you can't touch a single bolt, you can't change it.. Nato USA etc.. They had to buy from Russia because they said ok, do what you want..
@@xinjinpiig4062 Turkey wanted to buy patriot air defence system since they wanted to have advance air defence system. But US did not agree to sell it. So Turkey had to buy s-400. They had no choice.
@@Caranthirn When we look at it objectively, Turkey seems to be right in this incident. Moreover, it is sad that heavy sanctions against Turkey are imposed by western countries and the USA after the purchase of the S400. (kicked out of f35 program)
The US didn't want to sell to Turkey and the Turkish prime minister said they had to make their own. Moreover, Turkey said when their allies don't want to sell them military equipments, they obviously have to buy them from Russia.
Honestly, this is entirely about the Turkish defense industry. Obviously, if Turkey has to make something, they can't afford the long research and development windows, and neither their customers. So, they reverse engineer everything. From small arms to ballistic missiles. Another obvious point, if you need something good you either go to Russia or US. Turkey has sour relations with other options to say the least. Reverse engineering cuts from R&D time, and also allows Turkey to equip themselves with the said reverse engineered systems meanwhile the legacy project develops with the feedback and needs from reverse engineered project. The legacy program might not be the best in specs, but it'll be the best choice that fits Turkey's need, doctrine and existing systems. They basically hit two birds with one stone. Actually, three. Turkey has pulled almost all of the Turkic CSTO countries from Russian/Chinese influence. These countries can't afford US products anyways. So it's better for Turkey to sell these reverse engineered stuff rather than Russia and China selling them, despite the disapproval from US military industrial complex. Why the greediness over a customer you can't win for decades anyways?
The most important side of UAV's is it's avionics and softwares not it's hardwares. this what makes TB2s more successful compared to it's rivals. For example TB2 is first drone that ...... Fill in the blank please!
@@Graham567 This is actually one of the best comments I have ever seen under this video as a Turk. Simply correct that if you can not buy it, you have to do it your own equipments. To be honest, US pushed us to do these enhancement in defence industry because they did not want to sell us military equipment, also they fund to terrorist group such as YPG, to attact Turkey in the eastern region.
@@alanfernandez854 maybe not the coolness more like legacy. The Apache and A10 wasn’t scary because of its looks the Taliban feared them due to their legacy that when they arrived on the battlefield they were both highly effective killing machines. Plus most of the time the enemy could see them. Russian tanks ain’t even seeing these drones and the first they know of it’s presence the tanks already been hit and burning. Which in its self is probably even more physiologically scary. They are like invisible tank killers
I did wonder this, in particular after hearing how effective these drones were in the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict. Thanks for your take on their usage in Ukraine!
Not only did Turkey manage do develop a capable arms industry to support it's aggressive actions but also the Armenian forces were underfunded and given poor training and poor quality material to fight with.
@@christsoug8533Armenian forces wasn't undertrained, they didn't even use those real Army, people don't really understand what happened in Karabakh and think they're this war specialist. The Armenian prime minister and their government sold the Armenian people out, corruption to another level. For 30 years Turks getting their butts kicked in that region and all the sudden this clown comes in does a fake revolution and completely destroys the foundation of the Armenian military. Plus Azeri and Turkish weopanry was already 70 percent depleted and most of the territory they took was the southern flat areas where the drones worked. There will definitely be another war in Karabakh and those drones won't matter anymore. The result of the Karabakh war was already planned out for the loss of the Armenjans much bigger agenda in the future.
@@marcelogomes36 exactly, and the defense systems that were in that region wasn't used, the prime minister and the top notch people already knew that the Armenian people wouldn't give those lands without a fight so they had to show losses for him to make his move on signing off in backing off the lands. Two major/strategic areas Hadrut and Shushi we're handed to the Turks on a silver platter, no real battles took places in those key places cause those were the strong holds. There are roads for the past 5 years that weren't fixed and maintained in certain areas as one example to show that they planned on giving the lands away so didn't want to waste money, there is so much corruption and uncertainties in this war.
tired of the "are tanks obs" question. no. tanks don't work without support- clean and simple. we are just finally seeing AT weapons in their best enviroment.
plus remember we are only seeing successful attacks. noone is uploading their misses or ineffectual hits remember. footage without context is just a small snippet
Not to mention that tanks provide abilities that Air or Artillery cant. Specifically Immediate, heavy, precise and rapid firepower. And a cannon is always going to be faster than a rocket or missile
I think one of the success factors is the smart amunition which are cheap as they don't have an expensive engine. The next factor is the software which in permanently updated. It is told that Baykar sends weekly updates of the software to the drones. The updates are developed according experience from the field. TB2 itself is a factor but other factors shouldn't be underestimated.
I think the most important feature the TB2 uses to defend itself from air defenses is its radar detector. Simply knowing that a radar system is shining on you gives you a chance to run away. Thus, the Ukrainians can have a good idea of where Russian radar coverage is, and they can try to avoid sending any air missions (manned or unmanned) into those places. The point is - the TB2 doesn't need to be an unstoppable invincible super-fighter. It just needs cost effective means to try and survive. Anyway, I think a reason why the TB2 has had so much visible attention is simply because it records high quality drone footage. You don't need some crazy buddy with a smart phone recording over your shoulder instead of directly fighting. So there's lots of footage. And naturally with lots of footage there's lots of footage where it shows off a success.
The Azerbaijans were very clever they would remotely fly redundant airplanes to bait Armenia to turn on their AA systems then the TB2 would simply take them out.
@@EatMyShortsAU I've seen footage of that. The Azeris turning some old 1960s airplane into a remote controlled one and sending it over Armenian positions to get shot down, exposing their AA systems. Genius sh!t lol
Concerning Tb-2 usage in Ukraine, I heard that they are employed in combination with precise combat data from NATO reconassaince systems which allow ukrainian forces to perfectly spot holes in russian air defence, where the drones can engage in pin-point attacks at voulnerable targets. That's why Bayraktar's are so effective.
Given that Global Hawk we always have up over the Black Sea & Poland, and the numerous spy satellites we have coming & going over the battlefield I'd say that's very likely.
@@vatan6419 which pretty much any drone can do as long as it has on board GPS and can target and track something on the ground. Then you can work out the GPS location of the target based on the location of the drone.
Both Wing Loon 2 and TB2 was deployed in Libyan civil war a couple years ago. While TB2 showed its effectiveness in battlefield, Wing loon 2 failed miserable and Turkish Laser weapons shoot them down.
when TB2 are used in hybrid operations it increases its lethality 10 times. For example, Azerbaijan turned cheap planes (kukruznik) which used in agriculture into remote controlled planes. The army used it as a bait. When Russian S400 systems shot down them TB2s detected them, gave the coordinates to Harops (Isreali drones) and continued to search for other enemy objects to shoot down by itself. TB2s are very effective against S400 (Russian air defense systems). It is ironic that Turkey bought S400 from Russian at all costs, even at cost of angering allies and get sanctions, but never used them. Meanwhile Turkey was preparing TB2s.
The S400 is not for sparrow shooting. Which enemy is more dangerous, an airplane with a lot of cheap bombs, a large rocket flying far away with a large charge, or a small unmanned vehicle? The concept of using unmanned aerial vehicles has not yet been developed. As the conflict in Ukraine shows, it is better to have a large rocket and a lot of very cheap unmanned aerial vehicles.
The TB2 has footage of hundreds of hits in Syria, Libya, Ethiopia, Iraq, Armenia and Ukraine. The ammo sold in eyports is different than what Turkey is using. Also payload is different as Turkey uses stronger domestic engines. TB2 is a game-changer in 95% of the globe. The new drones of Turkey carry up to 1.5 tons of ammo, incl anti ship and air to air missiles, again domestic. They build unmanned land and water vehicles too, by the way
In the war in Ukraine, 3-4 cases of successful use of TB-2 have been published , all of them occur on the first week of the war, the further absence of video with TB-2 strikes confirms the statements of representatives of the Russian army that most of the TB-2 was destroyed or they cannot be used because of the inability to overcome air defense.
@@milaro222 not really, remember Turkey protested that the mentioning of Turkish arms harms the balance of the relationship to Russia, which is a balancing act betw 3 regional actors of which one is a super power
It is doubtful that the publication of TB-2 strikes can somehow spoil relations between Russia and Turkey in the current conditions, it is more likely that TB-2 type UAVs simply cannot be used when the sky is closed by modern air defense systems, TB-2 are practically the best in their class, but you should not make a superweapon out of them.
@@milaro222 i am not trying to, after all it is a 105 hp little thing that can easily be detected. It is just that those things have hit line 10 Pantsirs in Libya and elsewhere, with EW or not. And Russia had sent good stuff to Libya and Syria, Armenia etc, yet only ca 3 or 4 tb2 were hit, the others came back. I believe Ukraine is using them for recon and waiting for hellfire missiles to be installed as Turkey cant deliver mam's in the quantity needed
@@enginkazanci4727 The density, quality and organization of air defense systems that the Russian army can deploy significantly exceeds what was in Libya or Syria, the cases are incomparable. Perhaps the Ukrainian army keeps a large number of TV-2s in reserve, but rather in case the Russian army launches a rapid offensive and loses air cover.
Drones has lots of potential either used for super recon. Explosive. Or who knows a EMP style or jammer and lots more I find these drones interesting hopefully we can see more recon based drones and medical ones in the future
One thing to add here: The Bayraktar in combination with Javelins and NLAWs make tanks incredibly vulnerable if they don’t have enough air- and infantry support. This means that the era of blitzkrieg and armored spearheads is over. No longer can tanks smash through enemy lines by themselves and advance hundreds of kilometres. Warfare will once again be more stale and a grinding match. Whoever can produce more cost-effective weapons and have a more robust economy will win wars, instead of having quick blitzes through an enemy’s line. Russian army doctrine is still based on mass envelopments using armored thrusts, which is why they’re struggling so much in Ukraine. So perhaps tanks are not obsolete, but they definitely are obsolete as a blitzkrieg weapon.
Russian army straggling because of incompetence of its generals who mostly were bodyguards and military friends of Kremlin elite with no real war expereince and formal education due to rampant corruption and nepotism in Russian military academies. They knew about TB2s from recent wars still done nothing to protect their tanks and soldiers from them. Moskva death is another example of such incompetence.
TB2 / Javelins and NLAWS did little in Ukraine. Almost nothing. Artillery, as usual, is king. TB2s especially showed up poorly. Russians cannot do "mass envelopment" with tanks as they simply luck numbers to do such operation, not b/c they are afraid of totally ineffective TB2 (these things cannot get close to air defenses as they are such easy pray). Russians have only 70k deployed in Ukraine. That is it. 70k. This is hardly enough to keep control of currently held territory. This leaves very few people to attack. Hence Izium front with over 10k Russians is such a big, huge deal.
I disagree, it'll just change from tanks being the spear head to planes, drones, and missles/nukes/bombs. I think it'll be worse than no man's land in WW1. Aerial attacks in combination with thermal imaging will decimate FOBs that aren't strongly fortified with AA defenses. Cities will look worse than dresden and that's why the military is looking into underground warfare because armies and civilians will have to seek shelter in subways, sewers, and bunkers if they can't escape to a forest with enough coverage to hide from planes.
The drone is evolving the same way as manned aircraft did, 1st unarmed aircraft were used as scouts, then scouts took guns and started shooting at other scouts, then they mounted guns on planes, then bombs and rockets, then missiles.
@@zombiecraft6980no he is right. First drones were used for recconnaise then US armed them in Afganistan. Now US is testing air to air missiles for mq reapers. They are getting better.
@@christbenitez8797 check the Bayraktar Kızıl Elma, it's an air superiority turbojet drone and also can operate ground missions, plus they can create formations with a jet fighter and operate simultaneous engagements
Chief tech officers's name is Selcuk Bayraktar and @5:04 the quote translates as " future is on the skies" if you were wondering. TB2 was a natural outcome of the battlefield and there are better options available in other companies. It just happened to be that Bayraktar had a head start
The TB2 is more like a 115hp MQ1 Predator than a 900hp MQ9 Reaper, though the Predator was retired, and the Reaper replaced it. It's like the Predator and the A10 had a baby, minus the gun, which, if you don't want to get close anyway, is a reasonable choice.
Probably not just the weight w/ammo would be severly limiting. And reaction forces from firing would decelerate to 0mph rather quickly. Remember it's a lightweight aerial platform.
@@jakeaurod Not sure if you've been following the Ukraine war, but one of the issues the Russian's have been having, is they don't have many guided munitions, so if they want to actually hit stuff, they have to get close enough to be hit by manpads. That gun is cool, but it's also heavy, and you have to get close. The huge advantage of the Reaper, is it can hangout overhead(loiter) for a hell of a lot longer than the A10, and if something pops up, nail it.
Bayraktar TB2 drones proved themselves as effective tool of warfare well before Ukraine, in Syria, Libya and Nagorno-Karabag (Azarbaijan - Armenia war). BTW, the drone shown at 2:11 is not Bayraktar TB1. It is a more recently developed drone called Akinci and far more advanced than TB2. Akinci has gadgets such as SAR and AESA radars, can carry SOM missiles and even air-to-air missiles. It is in a different category than TB2.
@@tanura5830 There were WAGNER in Libya ..Wagners are fucking the russians war dogs..Armenian soldiers educatied by russions army tecnikers and supported Russions Long range missile and air defense missile as S-300 and other..RUUSİA or Any other country ..İt does not matter for us.TB-2 was little boy now we have his elder brother AKINCI and AKSUNGUR..This guys more stronger and deadly and long ranege from TB-2..
The way the US will use them if needed will probably awe inspiring and terrifying at the same time. The USA is a couple of steps away from lowering the recruitment age to 13 to get all of the top gamers to operate its drones.
Having been a USMC sead guy in the 90s-early 2000s I don't know why we don't have reapers carrying jammers and Harm. This would have sidelined the F-18G. USMC passed on the Growler as we had F-35 on the way...anyway, drones seem a perfect sead platform. My guess is that it's already out there we just don't know it.
Some makes very stupid statements about Bayraktar. It has very advanced electronics against signal attacs and magnetic attacs. It has also very very advanced data transmission encryption. And important thing is the advanced laser driven smart bombs on this. Not a simple big RC and up to NATO standarts in spite of viable options like low quality Chinese drones.
It's all about the context where equipment is used. TB-2 is really nothing technologically spectacular, but its use has hit a niche that makes it spectacular in its use.
Actually it was never designed to dive in enemy controlled airspace. After airspace dominated then TB 2 moves in for targets that is more risky to destroy with infantry . Bunkers, caves , it can hit a room in a building without destroy the whole building with micro ammo ‘s.
The fuselage of TB2 is made of carbon fibre, Kevlar and hybrid composites. It's much smaller and quite sophisticated compared to other vehicles operated in aerial combat. Radars of air defense system have difficulties in detecting them and when they do, it's usually too late!
The fact that the same engine that powers all kinds of ultralight planes bumming around also power the TB2 is hilarious but it is a fantastic engine. Super efficient, much lighter then traditional light aircraft engines and it can run AVGAS or motorgas. No way the TB2 could exist with legacy engines.
those TB2s have been the game changers in any conflict that they have been in. TB2 has been a nightmare for the Russian made air defense system deployed in Syria or in Libia or in the distributed land of Nagorno-Karabakh.
The issue is that modern day air defenses are so focused on long range missile based weapon systems that short range gun based defense against slow and low targets have bren rather neglected.
Insight from Ukraine: Armed Forces actually don't use them against tanks: they don't have ammo powerful enough and they are too expensive to target separate tracks and tanks. They hunt air defense complexes as Buk and Panzir, electronic warfare complexes, mobile command units. + strategic recon and intelligence (very good optics module + height- covers big area and can overlook far) And they do the job + ifk how YOU didn't hear about them... but they just wiped out Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh conflicts, they were fighting in Lybia, they were roasting russkies even before in Syria
Tanks are like cavalry. During the late middle ages, infantry started to be very effective against cavalry, but cavalry remained relevant in the battlefield for many centuries after the middle ages. So yeah, tanks have many strong enemies now, but it is unlikely that they will disappear in the next future.
I don't think tanks are really comparable to cavalry, although I see the comparison your trying to make. What makes a tank a tank is a combination of shock, mobility, firepower, and protection. Cavalry only has up to three of these aspects, shock, mobility, and some cavalry has protection. The reason why cavalry remained on the battlefield is because no other combat arm could fill the role of cavalry
True. But it´s dependent on the type of tank/cavalry. The medieval knight is comparable to the MBT, which seems to become more obsolete by the day. Light tanks/IFVs on the other hand still maintain their uses of supporting/transporting. Same pattern with the infantry revolution. Heavy cavalry was almost completly replaced by light cavalry like hussars who filled supporting roles. Even the "heavy" cavalry like cuirassiers were more on the light side compared to the knights/gendarme.
@@potatosinnato1767 In reality, cavalry has all four of that. Cavalry wasn't just heavy cavalry with lances, maces and swords. There was also cavalry with bows, crossbows and later firearms. Now imagine an heavy italian cavalryman with firearms, maces and sword in the XVII century: shock, mobility, firepower and protection. Cavalry was literally, for a good part of its existence, the equivalent of tanks. Of course there were types of cavalry that had different roles on the battlefield, like light cavalry, or horse archers, etc. But heavy cavalry was the equivalent of tanks.
That is incorrect. Since the inception of cavalry there has always been dedicated anti-cavalry infantry. It didn't just come up in the late middle ages.
The analogy between tanks and cavalry doesnt work. Tanks being used as cavalry was actually a huge problem during ww1, til people learned to use tanks as tanks.
Two things to mention here, Calculate the cost of defensive equipment and manpower you need to use for countering TB2? As the drone is difficult to detect, also take into consideration how many systems you need to employ to counter even a single drone? Secondly, The production cost of the drone and the weapon systems that come with the TB2. Nothing is high-tech except the software in this system and the software is developed in real war conditions. Try to buy a similar system from US and you need to pay 10 times more if they ever accepted selling it. You go and decide to buy a Chinese drone, the price is somewhat similar to TB2 but what about munitions. How about aftersales service and software upgrades which are developing every often. What you buy from China is a high tech kite which doesn't come with aftersales support and upgrades. If you want something which you can really use in a clash, TB2 is the only real option. So it is the war tested software and tactical data which comes with the TB2, nothing else.
Incomplete according to me while some aspects of what you say is true. This is a formidable and affordable easy to produce, semi autonomous and very economical asset. Software and tactical data are only part of the picture, software alone doesn't make it effective. There are also other aspects you seem to miss. It is a system of parts so to speak. The smart, precision anti-armor or bunker busting munitions, very intelligent and now domestically produced optics and ISR (Turks now thank the Canadians for imposing an embargo on ISR for creating a determination to invent their own), sat-link capability options, good range and high loitering time, very low profile radar signature ( I will not mention why here, since it is not due to only the hardware but also due to operational features ) make it a success. This drone was battle proven, in Syria ( with confirmed 2000+ armored unit kills against Russian supplied equipment to the Syrian Government Army ) after the Russians air bombed a Turkish Army column despite an agreement between them, also proven in Iraq, Libya and and also in support roles for forest fires, or disasters as well as in reconnaissance roles. All the things above make the system become very successful. Not to mention what appears to be an ease of use without detection. And yes of course some were also shot down in various theaters, which were replaced easily. I just would not want to be on the receiving end of this drone.
@@travellingmushrooms2662 They aren't bunker busting munitions. Bunker busters are long, very hard, and very heavy because they need a lot of kinetic energy to push through many feet of concrete / dirt to penetrate the bunker.
@@blakebrown534 He obviously talks about the thermobaric warheads. Those may be technically different from what is generally defined as a bunker buster, but they are still extremely effective against fortified positions, as they burn up all the oxygen on impact.
@@radonsider9692 everything is counterable. The fact that a system can be countered is not in and of itself an argument that the system lacks utility. The EW solution has a much longer reach and is meant to address threats before one has to start expending munitions (if I cam shoot you you can shoot me). Multiple layers of defense is a feature not a bug.
very interesting , I'll have to start researching into this more and possibly cover it in a future video- thanks for the heads up, if I've learned anything working on this channel its that the real information is always in the comments section here.
Some have downplayed the role of the TB2, but it's always good to remember combined arms, and how important it is for different weapons to work alongside each other. No one weapon can really be decisive just by itself, and TB2 by itself will not win the war, but it is an extremely useful bit of kit that will help. This same principle applies to pretty much every weapon, including the NLAWs and javelins people have been talking about. TB2s seem to be under a bit of an information blackout at the moment, presumably for OPSEC reasons. I guess we'll learn the full truth about its impact in Ukraine some time in the future. Some have been shot down inside Russia in the past few days so they're clearly still being used, despite people speculating they'd all been destroyed just because we hadn't seen any strike footage recently.
America did not use its drones in an environment with excessive electronic warfare and short, medium and long range air defense systems. America used drones against villagers who only wore slippers. It is the only drone in the world to be used in an environment with such intense electronic warfare systems and air defense systems. Turkey's drones. The only drone that has proven itself on the battlefield. America has allocated a budget of 20 billion dollars to Ukraine. Why doesn't the predator drone give Ukraine? The war has been 2 months. The person using TB2 can also learn to use the predator in 1-2 weeks. Let America let us see the predators, how successful they will be, in the region where there are so many electronic warfare and air defense systems. There is no one, sir, what, Bayraktar could not detect radars because he was small and flying slowly. Oh really? civilian Cesna planes are the same size as Bayraktar. Cesna planes fly at the same speed as the TB2. Cesna planes are also made of carbon fiber, like the TB2. Civilian radars can detect these Cesnas, but why can't the military radar detect TB2s, which, although more powerful, are of the same size, made of the same material and flying at the same speed? Some people just don't get it. They are making such bullshit for not getting it. Give me your right. The TB2 is a successful SIha. Size has nothing to do with face. Oh, and no one should hide behind other excuses. No, there was no Russian army in Libya, there were mercenary militias. None Russian systems were not active in Syria. There was no education in Karabag. Here you go, there is the Russian army itself in Ukraine. Where are the electronic warfare weapons of the Russians? Do you think they don't? Of course they use it to hit TB2s. But it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen. I'm pretty sure that even NATO systems can't stop TB2s. But there is no one to test it. Actually, we'd better test it on Greece.
@@oghuzkhan5117 in Türkiye itself they Use the Koral electronic warfare systems to guide the TB2's, so it is invincible compare to how it's been used in Ukraine or by other Customers of Bayraktar.
Better question: are the combined arms tactics obsolete?. Then you get the straight answer: never. Some dynamics might change due to new innovations, weapons and goals. But in itself, no single weapon category can be a sole solution for battles. Tanks never did, neither drones will. Its a combination and how effective its being applied.
Bingo. Blitzkrieg was nothing but combined arms tactics. Hell Alexander using cavalry in addition to infantry was combined arms. One type of contributor fills in the capability gaps of another, and vice versa. The fact that the Russians forget this is mind-boggling.
I was a TUAS operator (flying the RQ-7B Shadow) in the US Army from 2009-2013. When we were in Afghanistan we frequently engaged in manned-unmanned teaming by designating targets for fast movers, spotting for artillery, and performing reconnaissance (or even disrupting enemy attacks by going in "low and loud" when our guys on the ground called for support after getting ambushed). The aircraft itself had both electro-optical and infrared cameras, CRP (a communications relay package which made our bird into a flying radio repeater for units in the mountains), a lazer range finder and pointer, and a lazer designator. We even had blue force tracker on the birds, which gave the troops on the groun some peace of mind knowing we were overhead. And we could take off and land in about the space of a football field. Even though we had no missiles, we had an outsized impact on the battlespace because we were so well integrated with both ground units and manned aerial assets; and all this capability came with a modest price tag of $750,000 per bird, or $2.2 million for a whole system (including GCS, maintenance vehicles, and multiple aircraft). Not to mention, being enlisted, we were cheaper than manned pilots. Drones are definitely the future of all aviation - both military and civilian. And while "people movers" (air transport aircraft) will continue to have pilots in the cockpit - even if they are basically drone operators themselves, I think everything else (cargo, reconnaissance, fighters, bombers, and close air support) will be unmanned by 2040-2050.
I looked up the RQ-7 Shadow and it basically looks like a prototype Bayraktar-2 that has been in use since about 2002. So it's probably fair to argue that the TB2 is a clone of the RQ-7 Shadow with a sleeker design and better marketing.
@@ÖSA-q4w According to Google (I'm not into cars, had to look it up), it was Mercury who built a Mustang clone, so you agree with me? But seriously, this was not meant as a put-down of the TB2. Check out pictures of the RQ-7, the basic design (push propeller, triangular tail fins) is extremely similar and it has been around way longer than the TB2. The Turkish AF had RQ-7s in service, so once the US refused to sell them more drones, I could see how they'd put out a call for someone to build them a "better RQ-7". To me, it looks like Bayraktar took the boxy "prototype" design of the RQ-7 and updated it with better aerodynamic design, better motor, better (and non-sanctioned) electronics, better weapons, and probably easier-to-use software. To do that from scratch is an enormous achievement.
The shield existed long before the sword. A better analogy would of been the bow existing long before the shield, because the shields main function was to block projectile weapons, arrows/javelins/rocks from slings. This is why the shield was invented before any other piece of armor.
Would have* been Honestly, I learned English as a second language, when I was already a teenager; of all the confusing things in the English language that can cause you to pick the wrong option, I do *not* understand _how_ people can mess up "have" with "of". Please explain this mystery to me...!! 😆 (it's becoming so common that I expect it'll become officially recognized as "correct"💀)
@@MrNicoJac not everyone learns the full scope of a second language, I hear it regularly. Even native English speakers use the wrong words often when they have a weak vocabulary.
Love the TB-2. Its an entirely unspectacular mid-range cheap tactical drone option that everyone, even the Russians, have motivation to hype up. Real time, real-world example of how things like the T-34 or Tiger mythos came to be.
@@azure4100 I'd say more the Toyota Tercel or Kia Soul of tactical drones. Not gimmicky or anything, absolutely functional at its price, but certainly not a high level performer. It is accurate to say that it is vastly superior to not having a tactical drone. It is also accurate to say that the TB-2 offers a lot of utility, and that the larger prices of US systems present diminishing returns for the prices as far as payload and such are concerned, but the more advanced and expensive systems have integrated capabilities that TB-2 isn't capable of providing. So, its not just better than nothing. Its pretty dang good for what it is. But it lacks just as much as it has.
Yeah. While the AK and Hilux are amazing the T-34 was an utter piece of shit that caused death of so many crews that the Russians can't figure out how many even now.
@@HanSolo__ Agreed.The T34 was made to be CHEAP and easy and fast to produce, anything else didnt matter.Some were rolled out of the factory with the crew already in em.Ukraine is probably doing something similar now with some of the older crap nato sends,desperate measures require desperate solutions.The Tiger on the other hand since its mythos came up, was a very complicated expensive terrifying beast that broke down constantly.The PzIV and PzV were much better, that dont create hype, but work.
@@HanSolo__ AKs are _severely_ hit or miss, depending on where and when they were made. Ive personally fired 9 different AK derivatives and they were all crap stamped metal monstrosities made in the 70s or 80s in the western USSR. Ive been told about certain Chinese models that perform well and certain ones that don't. I've also been told that western machined models, especially early east german models, that are true champions. Overall, the AK reputation is more myth than reality, and the very best AKs are no better or worse than your most ordinary western counterparts.
Fascinating to see some technical detail on these weapons, and some discussion of their battlefield efficacy. I've watched several videos on the drone vs tank debate so far, and this one added a very useful perspective.
TB2 in Ukraine mostly used for searching and destroying antiaircraft on the march. Also its shooting supply/fuel trucks and mlrs. All that can multiply power of its rocket and destroy everything nearby. Other option is to stop column before artillery strike.
What I find interesting is that intercepted Russian radio conversations seem to suggest that they assume that any time their position is compromised or that they are engaged by fire from an unknown source it is due to TB2s. Kinda like how US troops in WW2 called every German tank a Tiger and chalked up fire from every relatively light artillery piece on the battlefield from mortars up to light howitzers as fire from the 88 mm flak. Clearly while the TB2 isn't "stealthy" as such, at least minimizing its radar cross-section was taken seriously in its design. And flying so slow may actually be an advantage. I'd bet that if you can get a radar cross section similar to that of a bird and you fly somewhere in the range of speeds that birds fly, that it might make engaging such an object more difficult. The idea of developing the battlefield was one of the things I thought was brilliant about the XM360 + MRM-KE, that it would allow massing tank fire at beyond visual range using things like drones and unattended ground sensors to find targets.
turkish drone have proven their efficiency as a game changer not only in Ukraine but also in Libya where the Russian+emirates+Egyptian forces helped by the french army were defeated and pushed back off Tripoli in 2020-2021
The sustainable and continuous development process and the ecosystem created with the participation of other companies are the keys to this success. TB2 was the most lost in the Libya operation. Because it was alone and the concept of use was not yet settled. Then came the Syrian Idlib operation. Here, the TB2 and Anka drones performed very well. In fact, they were used almost like a swarm. Because they were under the protection of the most advanced Turkish Aselsan EW systems. I can say that they cut the Syrian army and Iran-backed Shiite militias like a crop. Then came the Azerbaijan-Armenia war. They are involved here with a much more established ConOps. They also had the power of not only Turkish but Israeli "power multipliers" systems with them. When the intelligence of Turkey and Israel combined for the same purpose, it did great things. It would be pointless to talk about them. Currently, Turkey has developed the micro EW Pod, which can also be used with light drones such as TB2, TB3, Anka. It's under testing. Of course, this will be followed by those produced for Akıncı and Aksungur unmanned vehicles, which are much heavier and more powerful systems. In other words, the enemies are faced with a system that is constantly changing and updated, even though its external appearance remains the same. For this reason, it becomes difficult to develop countermeasures. Because it is possible to define these systems as "Exponential". China is an important drone exporting country. However, this country has a very, very bad track record in areas such as maintenance, support, and spare parts. However, if you obtain a Chinese drone in your own country with the co-production process approach, you have a sustainable system, albeit limited. If you buy it, you can only be happy for a year or two. It is very difficult to imagine additional development and change processes, even if you produce jointly. That's why TB2 is constantly rising in the market and is taking over countries that have worked with China in the recent past.
One thing that the TB2 has over Chinese drones is the excellent post-purchase customer service and support. They made all the difference in Azerbaijan and Ukraine.
They're only really seeing success because the Russians aren't deploying their mobile SAMs quick enough to provide proper coverage. As this video states, the drone's weakness is standard anti-air systems that have been long established. The Russians have poor air coverage discipline and their ground forces tend to drastically overextend beyond air coverage. The Russian Air Force has little to no experience or training in SEAD operations so they tend to get shot down a lot more and aren't very good at countering SAM systems, so they are tending to fly a lot less and only in areas pre-cleared by infantry or missile/rocket barrage. The Russians are mostly losing vehicles in areas they are newly pushing and haven't been able to saturate with missiles/rockets to clean out the Ukrainian SAMs littered about. This means their air force is relatively neutered and limited and wont fly out and get needlessly shot down some more. They should be deploying more of their mobile SAMs and keeping them relatively close to the front lines in order to properly cover their advancing ground forces. If the Russians are having this much issue with these Turkish drones, they'd have a hell of a lot harder time with the much more powerful and advanced U.S./NATO drones which have better optics, sensors, powerful engines with better range and altitudes and much larger payloads.
I would say they worked well In libya, seeing it turned the tide of battle there significantly. however, I agree that it wasn't used to its fullest potential, since there wasn't enough synergy between it and the forces on the ground.
@@Talishar Your point would be valid, if there weren't any videos of the TB2 taking on SAM systems with active radars. However, such videos exist, especially of BUK systems.
@@Talishar Better, stronger, higher, bigger, etc. Of course, they have importance. But.. Quantity has its own quality itself. All approach depends on who and how you look at them...
I've heard that the next "Force Multiplier" is going to be Ground Based Autonomous Drones. Heard that a small outfit called Skynet is field testing their T-800 even as we speak.😉
Cappy, I think you've hit the nail on the head with where we are about having to rethink tactics. I think there will still be recon teams in the field, but they will be there to use drones to identify enemy positions which will be uplink targeting data via satellite. Something else to consider: mines are stationary, but we may be entering a time when small, baseball-sized aerial mines come looking for you. That creeps me out.
We already are in that time. What you described is basically the modern loiter ammunition, like the us made switchblade 'drone' (not 100% sure i remebered the name correctly)
To all the obsolete naysayers. The last war where tanks haven't been around for the most part was WW1. And no one has claimed that machine guns and artillery make the infantryman obsolete. ATGM's have been around for decades. The issue with the Ukraine war is that the Russians haven't taken note of the importance of combined arms operations. Their tanks being obsolete is also not their Achilles heel. Israel lost some of its most advanced tanks in 2006 to Hezbollah using Russian Kornet ATGM's. The lessons to be learned have been around for a while. The biggest issues with the Russian army is a lack of coordination between services and shoddy communication between units. As well as poor training, morale and a lack of dedicated NCO's.
If tanks were obsolete, you need ask what would replace it? Is there something that can efficiently offer the same mobility, firepower and protection capacity as a tank?
@@brylleabella7153 I've had someone tell me heliborne infantry is a solution, I nearly died from laughing. Are MANPADS not a thing? We've seen how a heliborne operation into contested airspace went for the Russians around Hostomel. Bottom line tanks are here to stay. They'll get better armor, active protection systems and if introducing an autoloader the 4th crewman can be tasked with operating a dedicated mini UAV to spot dangers and targets. Better AA systems to shot down or disrupt small drones will get introduced. And long term the Tank itself may become fully automated with a crew miles away if we can figure out the signals interference problem.
The problem is you can supply every infantry platoon with relatively cheap, accurate, and effective anti-tank weapons. Losing expensive tanks in a lopsided expense ratio. You could argue about environment, combined arms, and misutilization of tanks, but the role of tanks is being confined. In warfare you don't always fight in ideal situations. Evaluating tanks and possible replacement concepts should not be forbidden. You sound like a defender of battleships in era of aircraft and missiles. Perhaps tanks are on their way out, still have a niche role, or will have a Renaissance with the right tech.
@@commonman4413 Bullets cost pennies to make and can kill an infantryman equipped with thousands of dollars worth of equipment. An artillery round costs about $1500 bucks and can kill an entire platoon of men with a single impact. Yet we still spend an average of $1 million USD training and equipping a vulnerable piece of meat. You sir sound like a defender of humans in an era where the flesh is weak and robots do all the work.
I used to give you a bit of a hard time in the past, but you've proven to be an excellent content creator. The amount of work you've put in to studying the NGSW and Future Soldier program so you can relay it to us in simple terms is commendable. And your continued analysis of the Russo-Ukraine war has been excellent.
Is a magic weapon which makes obsolete many other more expensive equipment? No, it however has performed way better than expected forcing everyone to rethink tactics, this is also a major boost for Turkish military industry.
The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan was when the Bayraktar was first used by Azerbaijan forces with devastating effects against the Armenians. Apparently the Bayraktar destroyed $1.9 billion worth of military equipment.
The TB2 (and TAI Anka drone) was used in Syria earlier in 2020 against Assad's forces, and in Libya in 2019 against warlord Khalifah Hafter (backed by Egypt, UAE, France, Russia) who themselves used UAE-supplied Chinese-made _Wing Loong 2_ drones which completely flopped against the TB2. Turkey also used laser weapons to take down a WL2 drone in August 2019, which is the first documented use of anti-drone laser weapons in combat.
in Armenia Bayraktar is successful because Armenia armor columns don't have air defense systems. Armenian S300 destroyed by israeli drones thats why Bayraktar succeed
@@vishvajitkumar9497 Yes but the S300 wasn't the only thing the Armenians had / they also had Tors, Buks, Kubs, Stugs, Osa's, pechora's, weren't of much use against the TB2
Turkey produces a domestic weapon systems based on new technologies. Most of them have already been found by countries like the USA. However, Turkey does these things much cheaper with its own experience and knowledge, with domestic opportunities. Maybe it can do 80% of the capabilities of US weapons, but it is completely domestic. Most importantly, it significantly enlarges the arms industry.
Once anti-air systems get good at shooting down drones-- drones will be improved for SEAD missions to lure and destroy those same AA systems-- and it will go back and forth. Aerial drones will need to fly with SEAD drones or include their own counter laser-laser systems etc.
This is not something that will happen it is something that already exists. Look at IAI Harop and Harpy from Israel that is can operate as fully autonomous anti-radar weapons systems. They might be classified as loitering munition because of the way the attack destroys it and they can't land if not used. But it is still the same idea and you often hear Switchblade being called a suicide drone. But drones for SEAD in combination with manned aircraft go back at least to the 1991 Gulf war when BQM-74 Chukar was designed as an areal target for training and ADM-141 TALD is designed a decoy missile was used to lure radar system that got destroyed by anti-radiation missiles from crewed crafts. ADM-20 Quail is a decoy cruise missile that was deployed in 1960 on B-52 bombers to fool the air defense system so the bombers can get through.
As fas as I know, Türkiye(Turkey) amd Bayraktar is also working on a fighter drone which will also release several mini, decoy drones to lure enemy air defense systems. Another Turkish company is working on 5th gen fighter jet that will have the capacity of controlling several fighter drones. Air warfare is going crazy places.
I expect that we'll see a lot more anti-drone weapons in the future, from missiles, to emp weapons, to other suicide drones. That'll be helpful in protecting tank columns.
I will not say if you are right or wrong about the specifics but this is often the pattern of warfare. Once more effective counters are developed; Tank-like-vehicles will be back soon enough. They would be unmanned, among other updates..
Civialians zones and bases too. After all, US uses for it spell "war crimes" all over. 9 of 10 death are colateral, that is not a number you want in civilian areas. Sulemani's assasination alone exposes it. 5 iraqui force died and drones take of from Iraq, violating s treaty, so iraq cute ties with the US an begin negotiations with Russia.
EMP's can make Russia the most powerful army in the world... If all electronics are defeated after a big emp strike those old diesel tanks without electronics will be virtually unstoppable.. Heheheee
In keeping with the "The more things change, the more they stay the same" concept...the US Army found when fighting the Apache Indians that the best way to fight them was with other Apaches...hence the Apache Scouts. Well...maybe the best way to fight drones is with other drones. I agree that every army will from now on will have to pay more attention to its air defenses and air superiority is more important than ever. How the US implements air superiority in the future will determine the future viability of armored warfare.
I remember reading about potential 6th gen fighter planes, that would sync up with a squad of drones to accompany it. And/or be able to fly unmanned as well. As well as the idea of using advanced sensors to relay targeting info to other attackers, which we are already seeing with the F-35. Things are really changing fast.
@@shorewall True, the F-35 is already capable of monitoring and controlling multiple drones and it set up for the "Loyal Wingman" program. The F-35 can also double as an AWACs monitoring and directing other assets onto the target. Most people have little idea of just how capable the F-35 is...we're way ahead of everybody else in this aspect. The Air Force has already tested autonomous swarming drones that are deployed from C-130's or C-17's as well as drones that can be launched and recovered autonomously from same said aircraft.
"Why haven't we heard anything about them until now?" because U.S. media does not cover anything that credits Turkiye. Bayraktar Drones have been kicking ass, but they couldn't ignore it anymore when Ukrainians make songs about it.
The thing is you can't really rely on US or Western media. Unfortunately, TRT World and Turkish PR is really mediocre. They need to learn from English-language Indian media and PR. Even a channel like CRUX which just posts slideshows with text gets hundred of thousands of views. Indian media-just like US and Australian media-relies on emotion and spectacle. The English-language media from Turkey won't even talk about relevant things that need to be spread. Even I stopped watching TRT World because of how useless it was.
@@karlyo6937 tb2 used to attack the tanks which got seperated from their armored columns tb2 is overhyped it was used by azerbaijan after all the major air defence system were neutralised . it is only useful for countries which dont have strong enemies
yes if you can keep a pace with production in last 3 weeks it is hard to find footage of Ukrainian drone hits from Ukrainian side simply cuz Russia Tor sytem is best aa against drone in the world,they have pantsir aswell but it is not that good,in Libia sucked ass but Tor is a beast,Russians decimate them,at battle of Izum they knocked 12 of them during one day,last time Ukranian Transport plane go to Turkey to get new Bariaktars was 3 weeks ago..simply Turkey can not produced them that fast..
I don't completely agree with you, drones right now has effectiveness at it's peak but it may start to recess, soon tanks are going to be outfitted with hard kill active protection systems they can shoot down incoming missiles. Right now they are in limited numbers, assuming you are mentioning tanks.
The "old" US Predator (piston powered) drone is about the same size as the TB2. The Predator was replaced by the Reaper (turbine engine, much more capability) as Field Admiral Cappy mentions.
@@radonsider9692 - Let's no overdo the praise of Turkey, a country with a mere six satellites. Erdogan has been killing his country's economy for years.
@@SilvanaDil satellites are important but we are talking something other than that you know. And yes he is killing the economy with his stupid decisions about economy
If one was listening to the Armenians concerning the Azeri-Armenia war, then you would have heard plenty about these drones along with loitering munitions in general. There is a documentary on this Azeri-Armenia war and how much it has changed the nature of warfare, so yes its a big deal and a game changer when deployed en mass.
Plenty of combat footage courtesy of Azerbaijan from the drones's or bomb's/rocket's perspective blowing up men in a foxhole or an uncamouflaged vehicle like an arcade game.
No one really took that conflict seriously because it was just assumed Armenia is a backwater nation which terrible military training. No one really looked twice with Azerbaijan ran over them with a steamroller either. But perhaps we should have paid more attention, these drones were probably the major difference.
Yeah Azeris used both Turkish and Israeli drones to effect. Having said that, the Russian army is more advance than Armenia and I don't think Ukraine has Harop drones nor the same amount of TB2s as Ukraine. So I think the Russians may have under-estimated the TB2.
@@realtalk6195 That is probably true. Nagorno Karabakh for all intents and purposes looked like an impossible area to invade. Full of mountainous terrain and littered with tons of heavy Russian equipment. This new military doctrine the Azeris used probably shocked a lot of military experts around the world.
Over30 years ago I was involved with the development and operation of a High Altitude - Long Endurance (HALE) Unmanned Air Vehicle (UAV). At this point I'm willing to predict air warfare is going to be directed more towards remote controlled aircraft. Eventually, remote controlled aircraft won't be able to respond fast enough for threat avoidance so the air vehicles will start integrating artificial intelligence systems. Sadly, the arms race never slows down, it just grows another arm.
I think that very soon, countermeasures against drone usage will come into play. We're already seeing telltale signs of it, in the form of the new Israeli active defense system that uses a laser. Among its target list are drones.
Hi Chris. As an Aussie Vietnam vet, (Ex Armour), I find myself inexorably drawn to conflicts still. Something of a "moth to a flame", love-hate scenario. It's hard to let go of, even after all this time... Anyhoo!! I wanted to thank you sincerely for you insightful & informative content & analysis, without all the proliferating bullshit often found, & especially now, re this conflict. So, thanks again, & please keep up the good work.
Veteran sir, have you watched the movie "The Hurt Locker"? So it's true/realistic? Near the end of the movie how the charracter's normal peace time was mundane to the point of being out of place for him? It was almost implied that he wanted to go back to the warzone. Or, tell us more about your experience. As a gamer who loves guns and stuff, but am socially awkward and a pushover in many situations (as I always expect people to be reasonable, but they arent and I always get fucked over), so Im effectively a pacifist, even though I want to be powerful. What's it like to actually wield life ending power? Or. Well. If that question is weird, then Im trying to say, I got curious about your story, if you feel like sharing more. From a psychological point of view I guess.
I’m a light fighter, the main reason these armored vehicles are getting chewed up is the lack of ground troop support. Tanks alone a just big targets. This is even more important when armor is operating in cities, in this case ground troops advance and clear building and obstacles in front of the armor.
@@EatMyShortsAU the smaller drones such as the switchblade still have to have an operator and a launch site within striking distance. The reason the Russians are having a difficult time pinning down the Ukrainians is because the Ukrainians are doing just that screening their strike teams by sending in scouts to pinpoint the Russian positions and targets. Then the AT teams move in strike and beat feet.
Imagine a weird future where military conflicts are just drones and robot things fighting each other while gamers from each country sit behind computers sending each other memes and having a drink while on discord calls, or proximity chats for the robots.
Don't forget the soldiers would be just weekend warriors because the fighting job is outsourced to the highest bidder: MEGACORPORATIONS! Seriously, this would make corporations our feudal lords.
Well I know this is going to sound bad but I am glad it is the Armenians, Russian and Syrian soldiers dying and not Turkish, Azeri and Ukrainians. If I had to choose between being a driver of a rusty T-72 or a pilot of modern TB2 I think I know which I would choose.
I highly recommend the book "Rainbows End" by Vernor Vinge. This book has a fantastic concept for use of drones to control the physical and electromagnetic space of a combat zone. (It's also the book that inspired many of the engineers that did the original work on augmented reality.)
@@alexseguin5245 yes, it's a "near future" sci-fi novel. Very creative / insightful story about integration of current technology into life and combat.
Haven't read that one, but Vernor Vinge is really good. The whole Zones of Thought series is one of my favorites. Telepathic quasi-hivemind dog aliens, godlike AI taking over entire star clusters, it's great.
@@roblangada4516 yes, his stuff is very good in general. Rainbows End is a little different in that it's set in-near future with more realistic technology. His story writing makes seeing the implications/applications of the tech very vivid.
Tb2s effectiveness is proven when you consider its capability in not just Ukraine but in Nagorno Karabakth and Syria as well. They cause much more harm than they recieved. They are small and slow. Therefore, hard to detect. They operate around 25kft therefore, no laser beam could reach to harm drones. Even if they somewhat attacked, they could provide location info of attacker for artillary strikes. They are simply force multiplier. When you come close to adversary air space, your adversary mostly has to fly its fighter jet to defend its airspace. Also, do not forget that flying swarms of drones (like tb2 in syria) is the new doctrine in the battlefield which tb2 users could adopt by training which boost their tactical advantage further.
One advantage I've heard regarding the TB2 vs Wing Long 2 are the larger percentage of carbon fiber used and smaller size of the TB2. This was probably not intentional, but part of Turkish effort to keep costs down. Unintentionally, the TB2 leaves a smaller radar signature in comparison. One Wing Long was downed by Turkish laser in Libya, where as the TB2 was probably not worth the same effort for the LNA.
It's a big RC plane, for heavens sake. The next step is counter-drone technology that targets the radio links. Then what? Well, then you take that damn $10k radio out of the drone and you put a $50 AI in that finds its own targets. It's not exactly hard to identify a 50 ton piece of hulking metal and to kamikaze dive on it, right? Now the cost goes down from roughly $5 million to $5000, so you can afford 1000 tank killing loitering munitions for the price of one large drone. The enemy will hardly be able to shoot them down with $1 million missiles designd for $100 million planes. So now they have to design tiny drone swarms that can take your loitering munitions out. At that point the human soldier is simply BBQ meat in a war between smaller and smaller machines.
@@pointblank722 That's the problem. You are investing absolutely unnecessary RF electronics and targeting optics in a million dollar design that delivers explosives for a couple thousand bucks. Why???? All you want is the boom, which means that the delivery system shouldn't cost an arm and a leg. The design philosophy comes from people who are used to building extremely complex manned fighter jets. It should instead come from artillerists. Shoot that thing close enough to the enemy that it can find a target, get within ten feet and then just explode the heck out of it. And then you don't shoot one at a time but hundreds. There is no defense against that.
@@schmetterling4477 loitering munitions can't effectively do recon or artillery spotter with their cheapskate radio. A traditional artillery warhead is still way cheaper than a one-off use drone.
It is silly to call this a force multiplier when it is just a very efficient weapon system. A force multiplier is equipment that makes a lot of other systems more effective.
true it's a bit of a stretch! I meant that the TB2 has ability to do surveillance and to coordinate artillery strikes makes it a "force multiplier" if an MRE can be called a force multiplier I think we can extend it to drones haha
It able to do the job of multiple units at once. That being recon, artillery spotter, and anti-vehicle roles. This improves the effectiveness of artillery and improves battlefield awareness for troops along with their anti armor capabilities. I think this counts as multiplying the effectiveness of ground forces.
“a” and “lot” are two separate things lol. A lot of words that people mispell are in fact two separate gramatical, syntaxical entities. 🧐 However, I shall allot you a portion of inadvertent misspellages and/or word usages, for your daily allotment, as these darned phone keyboards can certainly be frustrating at times. - Sincerely, Grammar “Nancy”
The important thing is that in the artillery spotting role it never actually exposes itself to enemy anti air because it only needs to fly high enough to have the enemy over the horizon, the high powered optics do the rest. If it flies up to its 5500m operational altitude, the horizon is around 260 km away. It can stand *far* behind friendly ground units & inside the range of friendly SAM sites and still provide a useful spotting role. Any SAM missile that can hit it from 200km away is going to be way more expensive than the TB2, has to be fired from a platform that costs half a billion dollars, and will be visible to the drone due to the trail from the missile. So if Russia shoots down the 5M TB2 with heavy duty systems like these, they expose a 500M platform to enemy cruise missiles. In some ways this is nothing new since air recon has generally been good at this, but drones being cheap with long loiter time, combined with the rise of networking and smart weapons that can target instantly based on information that comes from a spotter, makes the drones plus artillery combo very powerful. Then ofc there is the separate idea of loitering munitions like the switchblade which are an entirely separate revolution and sort of combine tactical spotting/target aquisition with the role of man-portable mortars, except they are also way more accurate than the latter.
2 ปีที่แล้ว +2
Yeah, I really don't think that Ukraine has any cruise missiles and even if they did, they'd have terrible accuracy on top of it being doubtful whether they could even counter-battery it in time.
Don't over estimate the optics. The cannot see much from 100km due to dirt in atmosphere. This is why TB2s fly low for observation mission - when you see videos of artillery strikes you see them from a drone just above, not 100km away.
tanks STILL fill a vital role in the military, and just like how the average infantryman, is vulnerable to machine gun fire, but still exists today. vulnerable to manpads or drones isn't enough to take away the tanks speed. nothing is faster at putting fire down range, not rockets not morter teams, nothing is faster, and tanks can do burm drills, and they have videos of tanks firing, getting into cover, before a rocket can reach them in time, just shows you the speed and importance of tanks.... it's still here, and will fill a role for many years
This reminds me of an article I read about monitoring systems that could be placed in farm fields and detect specific insects that damage crops and shoot a laser to kill them - which then reminds me how technology developed for war can be reapplied for other societal purposes
My friend Jordin Kare (passed away now) developed a system that would shoot down mosquitos with a laser, and identified mosquitoes vs. other insects by the wingbeat frequency.
@@Rocketsong Just looked looked it up. I would guess that the technology I read about was partly influenced by Jordin's work. They were also able to determine the gender of the mosquito by wing beat speed. Any idea why the idea did not make it to fruition? It seems like it would theoretically be a novel solution to Malaria, Zika, etc. compared to the expensive genetic modification experiments they are trialing
One small missing aspect is that some components for the TB2 are actually made in Ukraine. A mutual agreement allowed them to order and purchase the first drones before conflict started and aquire subsequent precontracted drones afterwards.
TB2s has a domestic engine TEI.PD. Don’t you know to Sanctions and Embargos to Turkiye.Old TB2s versions has a Rotax engine.Current Bayraktar TB2’s parts are %95 made in Turkiye.For example,new version TB2’s use to domestic Aselsan CATS( electro optical censor cameras) instead of Canadian products.Because Canada joined to West Sanctions and Embargos to Turkiye,But turks made more quality and effective than Canadian product.
Spot on about your points on the "Is the tank obsolete?" question. A big gun on a mobile platform is unlikely to be obsolete any time soon, but what people are noticing is that when facing a modern military with strongly networked forces, good battlefield surveillance, and cheap, powerful anti-tank firepower both on the ground and in the sky, the tank is becoming obsolete for certain roles. The old fantasy of tank platoons punching through the enemy line and rampaging through their logistics is basically impossible if your enemy is anywhere near parity, and against weaker enemies there are safer ways to achieve the same goals. Likewise, the role of the tank in providing a rapid response to breakthroughs has been largely replaced by fixed and rotor-wing aircraft and drones. In a similar manner, many of the tank's fire support roles have been supplanted by the proliferation of infantry fighting vehicles and precision guided munitions from artillery or aircraft. The question is, how small is/should/will be the role of the tank in modern militaries going forward? How often will a tank be of more use than an equivalently priced IFV, UAV, or guided artillery system? How will the technology of the tank evolve to fight against obsolescence? Active protection systems? Drone tanks? Directed energy weapons?
If there is anything most at risk of facing total obsolescence, it would be manned aircraft. Such a attack helicopters, CAS, and multirole fighters. They are one of the most expensive weapon systems in the war and have resulted in nearly zero impact in the war effort.
@@Frenchfrys17 That's partly because the Russians have poor SEAD doctrine and equipment, and also lack the necessary precision weapons. Were the Russians capable of covering their strikes and able to conduct precision bombing at a high tempo, they'd be death from above. When you're dropping unguided bombs and you're afraid of the very few S-300s still active, yeah you won't be pulling your own weight.
I'll add another point in that last part and it's perhaps the most overlooked. Advancement of metallurgy and other materials. While still technically in the iron age, we no longer use raw iron as the common building material but use it to make steel, which is stronger, more flexible and durable. Manganese alloy was the main material to create helmets back during both world wars and also for flak jackets, but now Manganese has been replaced with Kevlar cause the latter became easier to manufacture, became lighter, and more efficient to use than the former. In short, once the technology catches up, the metals and materials we use will be replaced or modified with something that has greater hardness and tensile strength.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The main issue is that drones have been shown to be more effective than manned aircraft while also being much cheaper as well. If you look at the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, neither Armenia or Azerbaijan used manned aircraft after the initial stages of the conflict. And that's because drones were just better, even picking off multi layered air defense systems themselves.
There are some inherent design advantages to the TB2 drone. It likely has a low radar cross section due to it being mostly made of plastic, and it moves slowly in that it's potentially much harder for it to be picked out of the "ground clutter". Faster moving drones may be more easily be picked up by MTI "Moving target indicator" radar, and will likely have a larger radar cross section.. Smaller drones may be harder to target, as they require higher frequency radars, but the atmospheric & water-vapor attenuation is greater for high frequency radar . Satellite uplinks are another factor that can greatly extend their range. The use of "star-link" networks that give then an internet connection can make them much more impervious to jamming,.
Most of the people dont understand how radars are working. Radars has some filters. There are significant parazytes on radar when high freqeuencies tracking from weather conditions to bird swarns reflections etc... Radars uses filters to eleminate these parazytes. TB2 has carbonfiber structure small engine, special tale design, narrow geometry, radar absorber paint. They all help for very small radar echo. Also it may fly very slow. So for radar operator it is difficult to identify if it is a drone or few ducks are flying above. Because anti air missiles are not cheap stuff to spend. Who fire anti air missiles he must be very sure that it is a drone. Because after spending anti air missile against nothing is not acceptable in any army. So many people dont understand it is hard to detect. Also Turkey use TB2 with Koral Electronic Warfare system. Turkey cleaned half of Syrian Army in just 3 days. Because Turkey use 50-100 bayraktars in network centric doctrine. When it is possible to blind enemy radars completely tb2 turns to terminator. For now in Ukraine they use it carefully. Also Turkish operators know how to attack russian air defence systems better. Turkisj TB2 s has self electronic warfare systems and satellite control.
@@darkprofile wouldnt it be cool if Turkey developed the first solar powered battery driven drones… low heat profile, more silent and even faster on demand.. I dont think drones has to be Quick during a detect and hunt missions… but sometimes to be able to unleach more speed if needed.. lets say 400-600km/h
@@MY-fv5dw Not possible today. Solar power panels are not efficient enough. And the batteries to save energy are also mot efficient and heavy. When we will be able to find a light weight and efficient electric storage technology it will be the end of man powered wars. Robots and Drones will be self sufficient and autonomous if there will be efficient energy suplly.
Tanks and drones could probably work in coordination with each other one day. Eventually replacing more expensive gunship and other aircraft. The drones can either designate targets for tank turrets to fire, doing reconaissance, or kill enemy drone nearby to provide air support.
Smaller drones are even more important as spotters for artillery (with or without laser guidance) they are used to great effect by Ukraine, destroying far more than TB2. Crowdsourced drones are flooding into ukraine, it's clear that every unit wants one for the overwatch and recon they can provide.
Reminds me of a video I saw where ordinary civilians used small drones (DJI - Mavic) to scout for Russian tanks and camps, relay the coordination to the artillery unit on the drone's location and clean them out. Because they are so small and nearly silent (too high in the sky to detect their propeller's sound) they are extremely useful and deadly on the battlefield.
The Drone is no more effective at attacking tanks than a manned aircraft is. The benefits are that it's cheaper and less costly to operate in terms of logistics, manpower and support (including airfield), not that it's more effective. Compare a TB2 to an MI-35. If a force has ineffective air protection, they are vulnerable to air attack. That hasn't changed since WW1 and the drone hasn't made any impact on that fundamental paradigm. All the drone has done is change the parameters of the same fight that has always been there. With air supremacy, drones have zero impact. Without air supremacy, does it matter whether it's a drone or an Apache that's shooting missiles at you?
Exactly, people keep forgetting 'suicide drones" are basically cheap glorified ATGMs or the more recent loiter munitions (which everyone calls a drone now). And Larger drones like TB2 are pretty much the same as manned light aircrafts, just cheaper and perhaps less maintenance intensive. Not to say they aren't a good addition, just over hyped.
Not exactly correct. The TB2 is highly mobile system. The command truck is mobile and the drone it self can be carried on trailer Realistically, all you need is 3 trucks to support it. the command truck, one carry fuel and parts and one carry weapons and additional equipment Now truth be told, its mobililty comes at the cost of payload but tactics can work around that
@@mikemikeson9927 cheap and slow is actually what made them so effective. They're cheap meaning they're affordable and they're slow meaning they won't show up on a regular as much.
I wish more young people would do something like serve our military before becoming a content creator. You clearly got a lot of valuable experiences from your time that have given your voice more honesty and authenticity. Cheers to you sir
There is a lot of misunderstanding regarding the TB2 and it's philosophy. It is not a hyper-sophisticated, uber-expensive weapon system that wins wars. It is the Toyota Corolla of drones. It's not your favorite sports car. It is cheap, reliable, expandable, easy to operate / easy to maintain and will do 90% of your daily errands. Sure there are better drones such as the Global Hawks, Predators, Reapers or Wing Loongs, which are more than twice or three times the size (more easily detected and 5-7 times as costly). You can disassamble a TB2, move it with a flatbed truck, assemble it back, and take off from any road in 30 minutes. Try doing that with a Global Hawk. You wouldn't worry about losing a few TB2s in return of destroying your enemies morale, and supply columns. And the most damage is not caused by the TB2's micro munitions: the most damage is caused by ground artillery and rocket sytems which hit targets designated by the TB2. And if you want to hit a TB2 which can fly at 6-7000 meters altitude and fire weapons from 18 km which is beyond manpads or anti-aircraft gun territory, you need to shoot a very expensive medium-long range air defense missiles at it, more costly than the drone itself ! Yeah you can kill it, but you will go bankrupt doing that.
Immense euphoria from taking out SAM sites that threaten you're Air Force, with a budget stike xD!!
Lmao Toyota corolla
exactly!!!
Nicely explained
This is it! Thanks
Another huge advantage of those lightweight drones: they don't need an airfield. A flat long road through someones farmland could do the job and the drones could be stored in a barn. Airfields are typical targets during war like we saw in Ukraine.
either underground and real farm on top or fake farm on top and vertical farms underground, either way, possible cuz a lot of land lol
I mean prop planes where always making a comeback for that reason : jets are specialized machines that require careful maintenance and clean runways ,
Prop aircrafts are able to stay in a wherehouse and jump from a grassfield without any warning
They've shelled a lot of barns too.
Also they are running on regular unleaded 87-90 petrol.
Where do the Ukraianians hide these drones?
Losing drone is pilot experience, losing jet fighter is pilot loss.
I hadn't really thought of it that way, its interesting to think how effective drone pilots will become because if they mess up they are able to learn from the mistakes - where as if a fighter jet pilot messes up in combat - all that experience is lost often times
I honestly think warfare will shift in the direction of drones and automated machines, less lives at risk and more capability.
@@Taskandpurpose i love every time china and N.Korea releases a weapon
it claims to be the best in the entire world
like those 50% chips packets but its 50% more air
@@Bluehemi The problem with that, it encourages more war, causulties make war less palatable.
"It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it."
Robert E. Lee
@@Bluehemi So what if you destroy all drones and equipment of enemy? Will they surrender, i am very sure not. War is not between machines but people so in a war people are the target not the machines. Machines are important to be destroyed because people use them to kill more enemy then a single person with a fist. Humans will always be there on the battlefield no matter how great the technology advances.
One feature of TB2 is psychological pressure. An invisible weapon is hovering above you 24 hours a day and night, and you hear an unexpected whistle and you have only 7 seconds to escape. Imagine the deadly psychological pressure on soldiers in the field.
Kaçarken de takip ediyor rusyanın yılan adası etrafında dolaşan botlarını vurması bence büyük bir başarı
@@user-pr1sp1og6d bende burdayım türk kardesim
A big part you glossed over is this new war equipment economy. The US has routinely opted for ultra-high dollar equipment that is "the best" Things like the TB2 and the NLAW are proving the viability of weapon systems that are almost as good at a fraction of the price. Exploring this would be a great video topic.
The thing is though that tanks are being destroyed by 122 and 152mm shells and tb2s are doing great at recon. It takes a laughable amount of javelins ect to take down a tank (3 to 8 at the start of war, around 25 now)
It's because the us builds its systems to be the best... Ukraine on the other hand only fights against the 2nd best military in Ukraine 😂
@@mariuspretorius7913 where did you get those numbers?
@@mariuspretorius7913 It only takes 1 jav mate. It could only take so many if the users didn't know what they were doing, not letting the IR system cool down and thus inducing targeting errors and missing as a result.
Tb2 is turkish?
2:10 That's not a TB1 it's an Akıncı; Tactical Armed Unmanned Arial Vehicle. It's closer to Global Hawk than a Predator. It's a Turkish unique concept for delivering havier payloads (I mean JDAM-sized ammo), air defense, radar coverage, and also for carrying cruise missiles for deep penetration operations.
yes exactly. and i like to make another correction. the reaper drone ist not the counterpart of the tb2. the reaper drone is way bigger and more expensive.
@@selcal1948 exactly. The TB2 is more closely related to the MQ-1 Predator based on size, range, loiter, and payload capacity. The Reaper has a much higher capacity, but lower loiter time.
To further add to your comment:
9:27 Chinese combat drones have garnered a horrible reputation actually. Existing users like Iraq and Turkmenistan have been switching away from it in favor of the TB2, and Nigeria is planning to do the same. In Libya, the UAE and Egypt used _Wing Loong 2_ drones on the side of warlord Khalifah Haftar (who's also backed by France and Russia) and they completely flopped against the _Bayraktar TB2_ used on the side of the Libyan government.
7:40 Turkey was the first to use a laser weapon in combat in August 2019 in Libya to shoot down a _Wing Loong 2_ drone. This is also why Turkish combat drones will continue to be resilient because they have sufficient experience with the counter technology. It's partly also why they've been effective against Russian defense systems because they're familiar with the technology since everyone in the region has been using them.
People who hate on the TB2 conveniently leave out the fact that the TB2 is actually a lower-end drone in the Turkish drone portfolio. The _TAI Anka,_ the _Bayraktar Akinci,_ and _TAI Aksungur_ are far more advanced drones but they cost more. Baykar is also developing the _Bayraktar TB3_ and _Kizil-Elma_ drones. So comparing the TB2 with the Reaper and Heron drones make no sense.
Yes its akinci tb 2 can't work without akinci near radars
@@realtalk6195 i think that mainly depends
Cuz chinese drones have horrible rcs
So they are easier to track
Pakistan used wing loong II to destroy terrorist compounds in afghanistan and waziristan
So they are useful for countries dealing with insurgents or terrorists
Otherwise
Western tech is better for dealing with militaries
A thing that you failed to mention about the TB2 is that because it's smaller that other drones of its type and constructed almost completely out of reinforced fiberglass, which gives it a very small radar signature, so it is hard to detect and accurately track.
looked like carbon fiber not fiberglass, but same idea & why they are hard to track. However, small drone similar size with a decent radar & m249 can be deployed over ground force afters (these fly for around 24hours, so possible to keep them in the air all the time) to search and destory these pest. RU cant afford it but US could until ground radar & lasers could take over some areas (limited as map of the earth flying gives radar blind spots). However, 5million each is costly - basically is a sports class plane (and same engine) which could be had for like $75,000 new plus maybe $150,000 in optics and $100,000k in radios/control and lets say $100,000 in racks/guns so no idea why they are 5mil each, 500k is reasonable excluding cost of mobile base stations ($500k each in a van or truck with an extendable dish like news vans) - simple PCs/screens, gen for power, and the radio/dish, a/c. Hell you could just make a simple smaller drone it 1-2 bombs at like $500k and do similar work and have 10x vs 1x 5mil one and have 10x results and be even harder to detect and shoot down. basically best version would be a larger switch blade US bomb-crash drone (think they are 50k each) but idk if the payload is enough on a tank (they are very small but my understanding is it can take one out if it hits the right spot) just make it large enough to use a small gas engine like 100cc engine so they can run on gas, have a bit larger of bomb integrated, and fly for 6hours & be able to land if no targets are foundand be re-used (likely would find a target in the 1st mission, but just incase make it well enough to do 2-3missions if needed at like 25k each (you know the switchblade likely cost maybe $5,000 to make but the company has to turn a profit) would shift a war with only like $10mil (400 of them) which is way cheaper then the billions in damages caused by war (ukraine is at like 8billion spent and 10x in lost of companies,buildings,people,etc
@@JohnAdams-qc2ju Software is important in such military vehicles. Even if you pick up all the pieces you've said and come up with something real, it's useless without software to dominate that hardware.
@@JohnAdams-qc2ju The Bulk of the cost is the software.
On a drone nothing is more important than the software which runs it, it's also the software which separates how effective these things are on the battlefield.
@@JohnAdams-qc2ju for two million it's definitely carbon fiber
Tracking has little to do with materials used and much more to do with the geometry of the craft. While carbon fiber and fiberglass is much less reflective than metal with the right geometry you can lower the radar signature by orders of magnitude
Turkish Drones the best Great respect from Poland.....
thanks
TR🤝PL
Sağol
The Bayraktar TB2 is a good example of why it is good to pay attention to small/regional conflicts. @5:40 you will notice the Azerbaijani flag in the upper left hand corner. Azerbaijan used these to tremendous effect against mostly outdated Soviet/Russian equipment during the 2nd Karabakh War in Fall '20.
@@DroneStrike1776 the same could be said for any non-stealth aircraft, so I'm not sure why people keep spouting that off.
@@DroneStrike1776 If your enemy has airspace dominance, you're fugged anyway.
@@DroneStrike1776 " Only work when the enemy has no air space dominance. "
bullcrappy on cappy channel. another tacticool genius spouting off his "knowledge".
drones work even with russian air dominance - they are small and hard to notice on radar, both AAA and plane.
Also recently Ethiop Eritrea war
Ethiopia used also turks drones
not to mention in syria, where turkey has a stake
The image you show on 2:09 is not a bayraktar TB1, it is a Bayraktar Akinci, which is a newer, heavier and more advanced and expensive drone developed by the same company. Bayraktar TB1 was just the prototype for TB2.
Ty!
Dude gets stuff like this wrong alot.
To further add to your comment:
9:27 Chinese combat drones have garnered a horrible reputation. Existing users like Iraq and Turkmenistan have been switching away from it in favor of the TB2, and Nigeria is planning to do the same. In Libya, the UAE and Egypt used _Wing Loong 2_ drones on the side of warlord Khalifah Haftar (who's also backed by France and Russia) and they completely flopped against the _Bayraktar TB2_ used on the side of the Libyan government.
7:40 Turkey was the first to use a laser weapon in combat in August 2019 in Libya to take down a _Wing Loong 2_ drone. This is also why Turkish combat drones will continue to be resilient because they have sufficient experience with the counter technology. It's partly also why they've been effective against Russian defense systems because they're familiar with the technology since everyone in the region has been using them.
People who hate on the TB2 conveniently leave out the fact that the TB2 is actually a lower-end drone in the Turkish drone portfolio. The _TAI Anka,_ the _Bayraktar Akinci,_ and _TAI Aksungur_ are far more advanced drones but they cost more. Baykar is also developing the _Bayraktar TB3_ and _Kizil-Elma_ drones. So comparing the TB2 with the Reaper and Heron drones make no sense.
Bruh they actually got a huge amount wrong here and even left out the biggest reason why Turkey pivoted to drone warfare so quickly in 2016, because that was the year Selçuk Bayraktar the CTO of Baykar Defence married Sumeyye Erdogan. Selçuk Bayraktar is the MIT educated millionaire architect of the Turkish Drone Programme. He was able to cut through military bureaucracy and red tape to supercharge Turkey's development and adoption of drone warfare because his father in law is literally the president of Turkey.
@@fludblud Was the Ukrainian rap song: "Bayraktar" played at the wedding?
@@fludblud Well, that's not really going to be a focus of a video of military armaments. There's a lot of lobbying going on in the US and Euro weapons industries but these videos don't usually linger on it. Turkey began pivoting toward drone tech well before the TB2 or Selcuk marrying into the family, it really took off with the TAI Anka. Baykar were more efficient with thirs but they didn't start it, as that was already the plan in the works.
2:10 - it's not a Bayraktar TB1, it's Turkey's new Bayraktar Akinci drone.
Also comparison between MQ-9 Reaper and Bayraktar TB2 is not valid, because those are different classes of drones, where TB2 is a small drone, that is mostly meant for recon with occasional high precision strikes, while Reaper is for strikes. The far better comparison for Reaper is the mentioned above drone, Akinci, because it is way more similar to Reaper in terms of size, payload capacity, range and its main purpose.
TB-2 is multi-purpose drone.
@@burakk4447 yes but mostly does recon and light attack duties
@@ismailmertcileci4199 agreed but the fact that the drones also can direct old munitions such artillery is also a force to recon with. I think its a brilliant asymetric warefare machine
@@MY-fv5dw yes thats its real power: Intelligence. It gains intelligence so they can mark and hit the targets with everything
TB2 is both for recon and strike .
Bayraktar is possibly the only drone which has actual battle field experience and is actually the only drone which has determined the course of a war (Armenian defeat ) . Now the updated version is much more lethal and practically unstoppable by current anti aircraft systems .
Iraq war?
Lol Armenia don't have strong air defence 😂🤣🤣 byraktar drone is ant 🐜 to Russia 😂😂
Ukraine has a new version? or just the old one. because today we know that almost all Ukrainian Baikatars have been destroyed.
@@MINYASPB Mainly becuase its not stealthy and the Ukrainians are using it wrong, a drone is no fighter jet no matter which drone. They had lack of fighter jets and used TB2 instead, a drone cannot replace fighter jet.
agreed
tb2 has changed the outcome of two confilcts, the nogorno karabakh and libya conflicts. The kills of tb2 are well documented with video footage. Hundred if not thousands of tanks, armored vehicles, air defence systems, ew systems and radars...Even tb2 has shot down a large enemy cargo aircraft while it was closing in to airport.
And Turkish Syrian operations.
Yep. You forgot to mention Syria bud. In fact it was first used in Syria.
Really? Where
@@thefisherking78 search for operation olive branch and operation euphrates shield
There is also Libya
The drone has proven itself to be honest. I first noticed them in the conflict in Libya. Where the did the impossible. Helping the GNA who almost lost the civil war, gaining more ground on the LNA. We saw the first vids circulating on the internet of this drone in action destroying Russian air defense systems. Which was totally insane to see. Then we saw them being used in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, were these drones also preformed great. Now in Ukraine, the even made a song about the drone. Strange to see how a country like Turkey because of some export ban turned into a drone power house out of the sudden. The impact of these small drones was huge. It played a major role in multiple bigger conflicts. I am pretty curious to see how the TB-3 will preform, which is also capable to land on an aircraft carrier. Which also will be pretty revolutionary.
How a country like Turkey? :) thats pitty and shame on you. We are not a lazy arab nor a calmy westerns. The point is these kind of high techs start up stopped somehow by politicians (you know who were feeding them). In 2005, Selçuk, the CTO of Baykar (tb2 manufacturer) said: when we try to make a field tests, the ministry always put excuses such as you cant perform bcs of the air traffic, we dont have plant, you dont have related regulation etc… now, there is no obstacles. I know, we are 3 world country, this is not a secret. Just imagine a country, there is always war in neighbours… iraq, syria, ukraine, armenia… idk where u are from, but just imagine then try to say again, how a country like turkey…
@@tahaosman791 Kardeşim hangi siyasetçilerden bahsediyorsun? Birileri tarafından yönlendiriliyor yazdın o yüzden sordum. Geri kalan kısım seninle aynı fikirdeyim.
Akıncı drone just got field tested on recent operation in northern Iraq. We'll probably see raw footage of it soon.
@@borabora3506 spesifik isim söylemesine gerek yok. Atatürk öldüğünden beri satılmış amerikan köpekleri bu ülkenin yakasını bırakmadı. Aldıkları amerikan fonu için, para için ülkesini sattılar. Uçak imalatı yapıldı uçurulmadi, ihracatı engellendi kapatıldı. Roket yapıldı önü kesildi. Araba yapıldı önü kesildi. Her zaman satılmış birileri bu ülkenin ilerlemesini durdurdu. Yönetimleri kötü olsa da akp zamanında bu drone olayının önü açıldı destek olundu onu çok tebrik ediyorum.
You have to take into account that pretty much all drone kills are recorded with the onboard cameras, so you see a lot more video of them being effective compared to a group of guys just lobbing mortars into the rough area you know has enemy troops are.
The drones are more accurate, so they look super impressive but they're expensive and only have 4 shots. A mortar team is cheap and inaccurate, but they can shoot 8-16 rounds per minute all day long.
Thank you for honestly saying that Turkey had to manufacture the drone itself, which it could not buy due to the embargo. As a NATO member country, I am still dealing with a lot of ridiculous embargoes. For example F35.. And the USA is increasingly supporting anti-Turkey groups, very interesting!?
I think turkey is showing nato its a team player lately
Turkey was playing both side thats why US dont want to sell their weapon. See how turkey buy s400
@@xinjinpiig4062 Türkiye simply did not want to pay for and buy an air defense system. He wanted to buy an air defense system and modify it for his own interests. But the imperialist powers were compelled because they said no, you can't touch a single bolt, you can't change it.. Nato USA etc.. They had to buy from Russia because they said ok, do what you want..
@@xinjinpiig4062 Turkey wanted to buy patriot air defence system since they wanted to have advance air defence system. But US did not agree to sell it. So Turkey had to buy s-400. They had no choice.
@@Caranthirn When we look at it objectively, Turkey seems to be right in this incident. Moreover, it is sad that heavy sanctions against Turkey are imposed by western countries and the USA after the purchase of the S400. (kicked out of f35 program)
The US didn't want to sell to Turkey and the Turkish prime minister said they had to make their own. Moreover, Turkey said when their allies don't want to sell them military equipments, they obviously have to buy them from Russia.
Can't buy them from Russia now. However, with Russia nearly out of the picture, Turkey has less peer threats.
Honestly, this is entirely about the Turkish defense industry. Obviously, if Turkey has to make something, they can't afford the long research and development windows, and neither their customers. So, they reverse engineer everything. From small arms to ballistic missiles. Another obvious point, if you need something good you either go to Russia or US. Turkey has sour relations with other options to say the least. Reverse engineering cuts from R&D time, and also allows Turkey to equip themselves with the said reverse engineered systems meanwhile the legacy project develops with the feedback and needs from reverse engineered project. The legacy program might not be the best in specs, but it'll be the best choice that fits Turkey's need, doctrine and existing systems. They basically hit two birds with one stone. Actually, three. Turkey has pulled almost all of the Turkic CSTO countries from Russian/Chinese influence. These countries can't afford US products anyways. So it's better for Turkey to sell these reverse engineered stuff rather than Russia and China selling them, despite the disapproval from US military industrial complex. Why the greediness over a customer you can't win for decades anyways?
The most important side of UAV's is it's avionics and softwares not it's hardwares. this what makes TB2s more successful compared to it's rivals. For example TB2 is first drone that ......
Fill in the blank please!
@@Graham567 This is actually one of the best comments I have ever seen under this video as a Turk. Simply correct that if you can not buy it, you have to do it your own equipments. To be honest, US pushed us to do these enhancement in defence industry because they did not want to sell us military equipment, also they fund to terrorist group such as YPG, to attact Turkey in the eastern region.
The most important thing about the TB2 not discussed in the video? That those inward-canted twin rear stabilizers look extremely cool.
how different ..i find them so ugly...
Maybe because it's a war anylist not a fucking art competition.....
@@danh9503 Arguably, the cooler it looks, the more fear it will strike in the hearts of the enemy. Plus it's badass.
@@danh9503 really ?
@@alanfernandez854 maybe not the coolness more like legacy. The Apache and A10 wasn’t scary because of its looks the Taliban feared them due to their legacy that when they arrived on the battlefield they were both highly effective killing machines. Plus most of the time the enemy could see them. Russian tanks ain’t even seeing these drones and the first they know of it’s presence the tanks already been hit and burning. Which in its self is probably even more physiologically scary. They are like invisible tank killers
I did wonder this, in particular after hearing how effective these drones were in the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict. Thanks for your take on their usage in Ukraine!
Not only did Turkey manage do develop a capable arms industry to support it's aggressive actions but also the Armenian forces were underfunded and given poor training and poor quality material to fight with.
@@christsoug8533Armenian forces wasn't undertrained, they didn't even use those real Army, people don't really understand what happened in Karabakh and think they're this war specialist. The Armenian prime minister and their government sold the Armenian people out, corruption to another level. For 30 years Turks getting their butts kicked in that region and all the sudden this clown comes in does a fake revolution and completely destroys the foundation of the Armenian military. Plus Azeri and Turkish weopanry was already 70 percent depleted and most of the territory they took was the southern flat areas where the drones worked. There will definitely be another war in Karabakh and those drones won't matter anymore. The result of the Karabakh war was already planned out for the loss of the Armenjans much bigger agenda in the future.
yup bayraktar is basically garbage if you have a defense system
I remember hearing tanks could become obsolete after what happened there
@@marcelogomes36 exactly, and the defense systems that were in that region wasn't used, the prime minister and the top notch people already knew that the Armenian people wouldn't give those lands without a fight so they had to show losses for him to make his move on signing off in backing off the lands. Two major/strategic areas Hadrut and Shushi we're handed to the Turks on a silver platter, no real battles took places in those key places cause those were the strong holds. There are roads for the past 5 years that weren't fixed and maintained in certain areas as one example to show that they planned on giving the lands away so didn't want to waste money, there is so much corruption and uncertainties in this war.
tired of the "are tanks obs" question. no. tanks don't work without support- clean and simple. we are just finally seeing AT weapons in their best enviroment.
@Sandra farasya NYET IN RUSSIAN *PROCEEDS TO SCUD-B YOU OUT OF*
*EXISTENCE *
plus remember we are only seeing successful attacks. noone is uploading their misses or ineffectual hits remember. footage without context is just a small snippet
100% agree.
Not to mention that tanks provide abilities that Air or Artillery cant. Specifically Immediate, heavy, precise and rapid firepower. And a cannon is always going to be faster than a rocket or missile
@@dandylion1987
tea i keep seeing clips of ukraine killing russian troops over and over. but never the other way around, strange kind off
I think one of the success factors is the smart amunition which are cheap as they don't have an expensive engine.
The next factor is the software which in permanently updated. It is told that Baykar sends weekly updates of the
software to the drones. The updates are developed according experience from the field. TB2 itself is a factor but
other factors shouldn't be underestimated.
same nickname wooaaavvv
I think the most important feature the TB2 uses to defend itself from air defenses is its radar detector. Simply knowing that a radar system is shining on you gives you a chance to run away. Thus, the Ukrainians can have a good idea of where Russian radar coverage is, and they can try to avoid sending any air missions (manned or unmanned) into those places.
The point is - the TB2 doesn't need to be an unstoppable invincible super-fighter. It just needs cost effective means to try and survive.
Anyway, I think a reason why the TB2 has had so much visible attention is simply because it records high quality drone footage. You don't need some crazy buddy with a smart phone recording over your shoulder instead of directly fighting. So there's lots of footage. And naturally with lots of footage there's lots of footage where it shows off a success.
Turkey using to tb2 with KORAL ( Land-Based Radar Electronic Warfare System), one of the biggest reasons why it is not visible to radar systems.
The Azerbaijans were very clever they would remotely fly redundant airplanes to bait Armenia to turn on their AA systems then the TB2 would simply take them out.
@@EatMyShortsAU I've seen footage of that. The Azeris turning some old 1960s airplane into a remote controlled one and sending it over Armenian positions to get shot down, exposing their AA systems.
Genius sh!t lol
Concerning Tb-2 usage in Ukraine, I heard that they are employed in combination with precise combat data from NATO reconassaince systems which allow ukrainian forces to perfectly spot holes in russian air defence, where the drones can engage in pin-point attacks at voulnerable targets. That's why Bayraktar's are so effective.
It's true!🛩
Also most UA army drones are polish made and not TB2. UA drones do not usually strike the targets. They light them up for laser guided artillery ammo.
@@hagestad tb2 can also pinpoint locations for artillery strikes
Given that Global Hawk we always have up over the Black Sea & Poland, and the numerous spy satellites we have coming & going over the battlefield I'd say that's very likely.
@@vatan6419 which pretty much any drone can do as long as it has on board GPS and can target and track something on the ground. Then you can work out the GPS location of the target based on the location of the drone.
Both Wing Loon 2 and TB2 was deployed in Libyan civil war a couple years ago. While TB2 showed its effectiveness in battlefield, Wing loon 2 failed miserable and Turkish Laser weapons shoot them down.
when TB2 are used in hybrid operations it increases its lethality 10 times. For example, Azerbaijan turned cheap planes (kukruznik) which used in agriculture into remote controlled planes. The army used it as a bait. When Russian S400 systems shot down them TB2s detected them, gave the coordinates to Harops (Isreali drones) and continued to search for other enemy objects to shoot down by itself.
TB2s are very effective against S400 (Russian air defense systems). It is ironic that Turkey bought S400 from Russian at all costs, even at cost of angering allies and get sanctions, but never used them. Meanwhile Turkey was preparing TB2s.
This is operator error. If S300 cant take out TB2, they deserve to get hit.
The S400 is not for sparrow shooting.
Which enemy is more dangerous, an airplane with a lot of cheap bombs, a large rocket flying far away with a large charge, or a small unmanned vehicle?
The concept of using unmanned aerial vehicles has not yet been developed.
As the conflict in Ukraine shows, it is better to have a large rocket and a lot of very cheap unmanned aerial vehicles.
Armenia didn't have S400 actually, ig u meant S300
The TB2 has footage of hundreds of hits in Syria, Libya, Ethiopia, Iraq, Armenia and Ukraine. The ammo sold in eyports is different than what Turkey is using. Also payload is different as Turkey uses stronger domestic engines. TB2 is a game-changer in 95% of the globe. The new drones of Turkey carry up to 1.5 tons of ammo, incl anti ship and air to air missiles, again domestic. They build unmanned land and water vehicles too, by the way
In the war in Ukraine, 3-4 cases of successful use of TB-2 have been published , all of them occur on the first week of the war, the further absence of video with TB-2 strikes confirms the statements of representatives of the Russian army that most of the TB-2 was destroyed or they cannot be used because of the inability to overcome air defense.
@@milaro222 not really, remember Turkey protested that the mentioning of Turkish arms harms the balance of the relationship to Russia, which is a balancing act betw 3 regional actors of which one is a super power
It is doubtful that the publication of TB-2 strikes can somehow spoil relations between Russia and Turkey in the current conditions, it is more likely that TB-2 type UAVs simply cannot be used when the sky is closed by modern air defense systems, TB-2 are practically the best in their class, but you should not make a superweapon out of them.
@@milaro222 i am not trying to, after all it is a 105 hp little thing that can easily be detected. It is just that those things have hit line 10 Pantsirs in Libya and elsewhere, with EW or not. And Russia had sent good stuff to Libya and Syria, Armenia etc, yet only ca 3 or 4 tb2 were hit, the others came back. I believe Ukraine is using them for recon and waiting for hellfire missiles to be installed as Turkey cant deliver mam's in the quantity needed
@@enginkazanci4727 The density, quality and organization of air defense systems that the Russian army can deploy significantly exceeds what was in Libya or Syria, the cases are incomparable.
Perhaps the Ukrainian army keeps a large number of TV-2s in reserve, but rather in case the Russian army launches a rapid offensive and loses air cover.
Being so small and with no necessity of a pilot cabin, drones can be made stealth much easier. Imagine a drone with a radar signature 1/5 of the F-22.
Drones has lots of potential either used for super recon. Explosive. Or who knows a EMP style or jammer and lots more I find these drones interesting hopefully we can see more recon based drones and medical ones in the future
Imagine a drone with the stealth technology of F-22.
@@ramsankar.p2256
*Already probably exists lol*
@@proger1960 wel hopefully a medic drone or a drone able to shoot stuff like sleeping dart incase a country needs Intel or schock dart
@@gundamdude8351
That probably already maybe exists cause it’s plausible lol , but a medic drone sounds nice
One thing to add here:
The Bayraktar in combination with Javelins and NLAWs make tanks incredibly vulnerable if they don’t have enough air- and infantry support. This means that the era of blitzkrieg and armored spearheads is over. No longer can tanks smash through enemy lines by themselves and advance hundreds of kilometres.
Warfare will once again be more stale and a grinding match. Whoever can produce more cost-effective weapons and have a more robust economy will win wars, instead of having quick blitzes through an enemy’s line.
Russian army doctrine is still based on mass envelopments using armored thrusts, which is why they’re struggling so much in Ukraine.
So perhaps tanks are not obsolete, but they definitely are obsolete as a blitzkrieg weapon.
Russian army straggling because of incompetence of its generals who mostly were bodyguards and military friends of Kremlin elite with no real war expereince and formal education due to rampant corruption and nepotism in Russian military academies. They knew about TB2s from recent wars still done nothing to protect their tanks and soldiers from them. Moskva death is another example of such incompetence.
TB2 / Javelins and NLAWS did little in Ukraine. Almost nothing. Artillery, as usual, is king. TB2s especially showed up poorly.
Russians cannot do "mass envelopment" with tanks as they simply luck numbers to do such operation, not b/c they are afraid of totally ineffective TB2 (these things cannot get close to air defenses as they are such easy pray). Russians have only 70k deployed in Ukraine. That is it. 70k. This is hardly enough to keep control of currently held territory. This leaves very few people to attack. Hence Izium front with over 10k Russians is such a big, huge deal.
I disagree, it'll just change from tanks being the spear head to planes, drones, and missles/nukes/bombs. I think it'll be worse than no man's land in WW1. Aerial attacks in combination with thermal imaging will decimate FOBs that aren't strongly fortified with AA defenses. Cities will look worse than dresden and that's why the military is looking into underground warfare because armies and civilians will have to seek shelter in subways, sewers, and bunkers if they can't escape to a forest with enough coverage to hide from planes.
@@Bagginsess How can you hide in a forest from a plane? How?
@@tomk3732 leaves... branches...
The effectiveness of Bayraktar TB2 in real war is a proof of success of Baykar Technologies
The drone is evolving the same way as manned aircraft did, 1st unarmed aircraft were used as scouts, then scouts took guns and started shooting at other scouts, then they mounted guns on planes, then bombs and rockets, then missiles.
@@zombiecraft6980no he is right. First drones were used for recconnaise then US armed them in Afganistan. Now US is testing air to air missiles for mq reapers. They are getting better.
The next time we hear and see is a Air superiority fighter drone.
While the pilot is at base with a 360° circular cockpit view, surrounding the room.
@@christbenitez8797 check the Bayraktar Kızıl Elma, it's an air superiority turbojet drone and also can operate ground missions, plus they can create formations with a jet fighter and operate simultaneous engagements
@@Polo-rn8ly next stage will be drones dogfighting
@@christbenitez8797 why use a signle pilot.. maybe it will be a human assisted AI-pilot instead
Chief tech officers's name is Selcuk Bayraktar and @5:04 the quote translates as " future is on the skies" if you were wondering. TB2 was a natural outcome of the battlefield and there are better options available in other companies. It just happened to be that Bayraktar had a head start
The TB2 is more like a 115hp MQ1 Predator than a 900hp MQ9 Reaper, though the Predator was retired, and the Reaper replaced it. It's like the Predator and the A10 had a baby, minus the gun, which, if you don't want to get close anyway, is a reasonable choice.
But can they put a 30mm gatling gun on it that go brrr?
Probably not just the weight w/ammo would be severly limiting. And reaction forces from firing would decelerate to 0mph rather quickly. Remember it's a lightweight aerial platform.
@@jakeaurod Not sure if you've been following the Ukraine war, but one of the issues the Russian's have been having, is they don't have many guided munitions, so if they want to actually hit stuff, they have to get close enough to be hit by manpads. That gun is cool, but it's also heavy, and you have to get close. The huge advantage of the Reaper, is it can hangout overhead(loiter) for a hell of a lot longer than the A10, and if something pops up, nail it.
@@jakeaurod A single shot 30mm cannon would break that drone with it's recoil.
Bayraktar TB2 drones proved themselves as effective tool of warfare well before Ukraine, in Syria, Libya and Nagorno-Karabag (Azarbaijan - Armenia war).
BTW, the drone shown at 2:11 is not Bayraktar TB1.
It is a more recently developed drone called Akinci and far more advanced than TB2.
Akinci has gadgets such as SAR and AESA radars, can carry SOM missiles and even air-to-air missiles.
It is in a different category than TB2.
But is it effective towards Russia? Libya is not Russia, Armenia is not Russia.
@@tanura5830 There were WAGNER in Libya ..Wagners are fucking the russians war dogs..Armenian soldiers educatied by russions army tecnikers and supported Russions Long range missile and air defense missile as S-300 and other..RUUSİA or Any other country ..İt does not matter for us.TB-2 was little boy now we have his elder brother AKINCI and AKSUNGUR..This guys more stronger and deadly and long ranege from TB-2..
@@tanura5830 absolutely they shot down many rus tanks
Having been a Navy EW guy during the 80'sand 90's I was thinking this drone wave is a complete game changer!
The way the US will use them if needed will probably awe inspiring and terrifying at the same time. The USA is a couple of steps away from lowering the recruitment age to 13 to get all of the top gamers to operate its drones.
@@KKSuited WHAT? 13 year olds can't handle that moral weight on their shoulders or controllers. That's sick
Having been a USMC sead guy in the 90s-early 2000s I don't know why we don't have reapers carrying jammers and Harm. This would have sidelined the F-18G. USMC passed on the Growler as we had F-35 on the way...anyway, drones seem a perfect sead platform. My guess is that it's already out there we just don't know it.
Some makes very stupid statements about Bayraktar. It has very advanced electronics against signal attacs and magnetic attacs. It has also very very advanced data transmission encryption. And important thing is the advanced laser driven smart bombs on this. Not a simple big RC and up to NATO standarts in spite of viable options like low quality Chinese drones.
It's all about the context where equipment is used. TB-2 is really nothing technologically spectacular, but its use has hit a niche that makes it spectacular in its use.
TB2 is essentially Guerrilla Warfare on steroids.
Actually it was never designed to dive in enemy controlled airspace. After airspace dominated then TB 2 moves in for targets that is more risky to destroy with infantry . Bunkers, caves , it can hit a room in a building without destroy the whole building with micro ammo ‘s.
The fuselage of TB2 is made of carbon fibre, Kevlar and hybrid composites. It's much smaller and quite sophisticated compared to other vehicles operated in aerial combat. Radars of air defense system have difficulties in detecting them and when they do, it's usually too late!
The fact that the same engine that powers all kinds of ultralight planes bumming around also power the TB2 is hilarious but it is a fantastic engine. Super efficient, much lighter then traditional light aircraft engines and it can run AVGAS or motorgas. No way the TB2 could exist with legacy engines.
@It's all sausage to me ah very interesting!! Could very well be.
@It's all sausage to me geçti hacı kullanılıyor
How about installing the engine from the VW beetle ;-)
@@robrob9050 that would be hilarious yet effective lol
those TB2s have been the game changers in any conflict that they have been in.
TB2 has been a nightmare for the Russian made air defense system deployed in Syria or in Libia or in the distributed land of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Exactly this military "specialist" says he didn't heard it before lol
Why then it's stopped to be a problem for Russians in Ukraine?
Maybe because Russians actually know how to use Anti aircraft systems?
The issue is that modern day air defenses are so focused on long range missile based weapon systems that short range gun based defense against slow and low targets have bren rather neglected.
Are they operating in Ukraine? Cause they seem to have gone missing
@@jimbo62 not at the large scale. Turkey still refrains from active support to the Ukraine. Too many economic ties with Russia.
Insight from Ukraine:
Armed Forces actually don't use them against tanks: they don't have ammo powerful enough and they are too expensive to target separate tracks and tanks.
They hunt air defense complexes as Buk and Panzir, electronic warfare complexes, mobile command units. + strategic recon and intelligence (very good optics module + height- covers big area and can overlook far)
And they do the job
+ ifk how YOU didn't hear about them... but they just wiped out Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh conflicts, they were fighting in Lybia, they were roasting russkies even before in Syria
I'm glad this playlist made me discover your channel!
Tanks are like cavalry. During the late middle ages, infantry started to be very effective against cavalry, but cavalry remained relevant in the battlefield for many centuries after the middle ages. So yeah, tanks have many strong enemies now, but it is unlikely that they will disappear in the next future.
I don't think tanks are really comparable to cavalry, although I see the comparison your trying to make. What makes a tank a tank is a combination of shock, mobility, firepower, and protection. Cavalry only has up to three of these aspects, shock, mobility, and some cavalry has protection. The reason why cavalry remained on the battlefield is because no other combat arm could fill the role of cavalry
True. But it´s dependent on the type of tank/cavalry.
The medieval knight is comparable to the MBT, which seems to become more obsolete by the day.
Light tanks/IFVs on the other hand still maintain their uses of supporting/transporting.
Same pattern with the infantry revolution. Heavy cavalry was almost completly replaced by light cavalry like hussars who filled supporting roles.
Even the "heavy" cavalry like cuirassiers were more on the light side compared to the knights/gendarme.
@@potatosinnato1767
In reality, cavalry has all four of that. Cavalry wasn't just heavy cavalry with lances, maces and swords. There was also cavalry with bows, crossbows and later firearms. Now imagine an heavy italian cavalryman with firearms, maces and sword in the XVII century: shock, mobility, firepower and protection. Cavalry was literally, for a good part of its existence, the equivalent of tanks.
Of course there were types of cavalry that had different roles on the battlefield, like light cavalry, or horse archers, etc. But heavy cavalry was the equivalent of tanks.
That is incorrect. Since the inception of cavalry there has always been dedicated anti-cavalry infantry. It didn't just come up in the late middle ages.
The analogy between tanks and cavalry doesnt work. Tanks being used as cavalry was actually a huge problem during ww1, til people learned to use tanks as tanks.
Two things to mention here,
Calculate the cost of defensive equipment and manpower you need to use for countering TB2? As the drone is difficult to detect, also take into consideration how many systems you need to employ to counter even a single drone?
Secondly,
The production cost of the drone and the weapon systems that come with the TB2. Nothing is high-tech except the software in this system and the software is developed in real war conditions.
Try to buy a similar system from US and you need to pay 10 times more if they ever accepted selling it.
You go and decide to buy a Chinese drone, the price is somewhat similar to TB2 but what about munitions. How about aftersales service and software upgrades which are developing every often. What you buy from China is a high tech kite which doesn't come with aftersales support and upgrades.
If you want something which you can really use in a clash, TB2 is the only real option.
So it is the war tested software and tactical data which comes with the TB2, nothing else.
Incomplete according to me while some aspects of what you say is true. This is a formidable and affordable easy to produce, semi autonomous and very economical asset. Software and tactical data are only part of the picture, software alone doesn't make it effective.
There are also other aspects you seem to miss.
It is a system of parts so to speak. The smart, precision anti-armor or bunker busting munitions, very intelligent and now domestically produced optics and ISR (Turks now thank the Canadians for imposing an embargo on ISR for creating a determination to invent their own), sat-link capability options, good range and high loitering time, very low profile radar signature ( I will not mention why here, since it is not due to only the hardware but also due to operational features ) make it a success.
This drone was battle proven, in Syria ( with confirmed 2000+ armored unit kills against Russian supplied equipment to the Syrian Government Army ) after the Russians air bombed a Turkish Army column despite an agreement between them, also proven in Iraq, Libya and and also in support roles for forest fires, or disasters as well as in reconnaissance roles.
All the things above make the system become very successful. Not to mention what appears to be an ease of use without detection. And yes of course some were also shot down in various theaters, which were replaced easily. I just would not want to be on the receiving end of this drone.
The Lira having significantly crashed over the recent years helps Turkey in the cost area as well, in terms of exporting it.
@@travellingmushrooms2662 They aren't bunker busting munitions. Bunker busters are long, very hard, and very heavy because they need a lot of kinetic energy to push through many feet of concrete / dirt to penetrate the bunker.
@@DroneStrike1776 The Russians C-RAM is AK-630. We've all seen how effective it was at the their flagship Moskva.
@@blakebrown534 He obviously talks about the thermobaric warheads. Those may be technically different from what is generally defined as a bunker buster, but they are still extremely effective against fortified positions, as they burn up all the oxygen on impact.
For current US anti-drone solutions look into the Leonardo DRS MLIDS system.
A neat 2 vehicle solution that pairs EW and Kinetic solutions.
EW is counterable, but lasers and kinetic solutions are not.
@@radonsider9692 everything is counterable. The fact that a system can be countered is not in and of itself an argument that the system lacks utility.
The EW solution has a much longer reach and is meant to address threats before one has to start expending munitions (if I cam shoot you you can shoot me). Multiple layers of defense is a feature not a bug.
very interesting , I'll have to start researching into this more and possibly cover it in a future video- thanks for the heads up, if I've learned anything working on this channel its that the real information is always in the comments section here.
@@radonsider9692 mirror beats laser
@@Pyratemime yes, the best we have is multiple layered defence atm.
Some have downplayed the role of the TB2, but it's always good to remember combined arms, and how important it is for different weapons to work alongside each other. No one weapon can really be decisive just by itself, and TB2 by itself will not win the war, but it is an extremely useful bit of kit that will help. This same principle applies to pretty much every weapon, including the NLAWs and javelins people have been talking about.
TB2s seem to be under a bit of an information blackout at the moment, presumably for OPSEC reasons. I guess we'll learn the full truth about its impact in Ukraine some time in the future. Some have been shot down inside Russia in the past few days so they're clearly still being used, despite people speculating they'd all been destroyed just because we hadn't seen any strike footage recently.
America did not use its drones in an environment with excessive electronic warfare and short, medium and long range air defense systems. America used drones against villagers who only wore slippers. It is the only drone in the world to be used in an environment with such intense electronic warfare systems and air defense systems. Turkey's drones. The only drone that has proven itself on the battlefield. America has allocated a budget of 20 billion dollars to Ukraine. Why doesn't the predator drone give Ukraine? The war has been 2 months. The person using TB2 can also learn to use the predator in 1-2 weeks. Let America let us see the predators, how successful they will be, in the region where there are so many electronic warfare and air defense systems.
There is no one, sir, what, Bayraktar could not detect radars because he was small and flying slowly. Oh really? civilian Cesna planes are the same size as Bayraktar. Cesna planes fly at the same speed as the TB2. Cesna planes are also made of carbon fiber, like the TB2. Civilian radars can detect these Cesnas, but why can't the military radar detect TB2s, which, although more powerful, are of the same size, made of the same material and flying at the same speed?
Some people just don't get it. They are making such bullshit for not getting it. Give me your right. The TB2 is a successful SIha. Size has nothing to do with face.
Oh, and no one should hide behind other excuses. No, there was no Russian army in Libya, there were mercenary militias. None Russian systems were not active in Syria. There was no education in Karabag. Here you go, there is the Russian army itself in Ukraine. Where are the electronic warfare weapons of the Russians? Do you think they don't? Of course they use it to hit TB2s. But it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen.
I'm pretty sure that even NATO systems can't stop TB2s. But there is no one to test it. Actually, we'd better test it on Greece.
@@oghuzkhan5117 in Türkiye itself they Use the Koral electronic warfare systems to guide the TB2's, so it is invincible compare to how it's been used in Ukraine or by other Customers of Bayraktar.
Rusya propaganda yapıyor. Türkiyenin envanterinde bulunan sihadan daha fazlasını vurduğunu iddia ediyor 😅
Better question: are the combined arms tactics obsolete?. Then you get the straight answer: never. Some dynamics might change due to new innovations, weapons and goals. But in itself, no single weapon category can be a sole solution for battles. Tanks never did, neither drones will. Its a combination and how effective its being applied.
@u know me thank you.
Bingo. Blitzkrieg was nothing but combined arms tactics. Hell Alexander using cavalry in addition to infantry was combined arms. One type of contributor fills in the capability gaps of another, and vice versa. The fact that the Russians forget this is mind-boggling.
Yeah
Just like the battleship! Oh wait... well then - just like cavalry charges! Oh wait...
@@gae_wead_dad_6914 Those are single weapons, dork. Thanks for proving the point.
Ive always seen air as superior to land or sea... It's the reason why nukes and MIRVs are so scary... Speed and maximum mobility
I was a TUAS operator (flying the RQ-7B Shadow) in the US Army from 2009-2013. When we were in Afghanistan we frequently engaged in manned-unmanned teaming by designating targets for fast movers, spotting for artillery, and performing reconnaissance (or even disrupting enemy attacks by going in "low and loud" when our guys on the ground called for support after getting ambushed).
The aircraft itself had both electro-optical and infrared cameras, CRP (a communications relay package which made our bird into a flying radio repeater for units in the mountains), a lazer range finder and pointer, and a lazer designator. We even had blue force tracker on the birds, which gave the troops on the groun some peace of mind knowing we were overhead. And we could take off and land in about the space of a football field.
Even though we had no missiles, we had an outsized impact on the battlespace because we were so well integrated with both ground units and manned aerial assets; and all this capability came with a modest price tag of $750,000 per bird, or $2.2 million for a whole system (including GCS, maintenance vehicles, and multiple aircraft). Not to mention, being enlisted, we were cheaper than manned pilots.
Drones are definitely the future of all aviation - both military and civilian. And while "people movers" (air transport aircraft) will continue to have pilots in the cockpit - even if they are basically drone operators themselves, I think everything else (cargo, reconnaissance, fighters, bombers, and close air support) will be unmanned by 2040-2050.
fascinating
I looked up the RQ-7 Shadow and it basically looks like a prototype Bayraktar-2 that has been in use since about 2002. So it's probably fair to argue that the TB2 is a clone of the RQ-7 Shadow with a sleeker design and better marketing.
@@thomaswieland9284 yeah like how the mustang is a merc clone.. not..
Ditto. Well summarized.
@@ÖSA-q4w According to Google (I'm not into cars, had to look it up), it was Mercury who built a Mustang clone, so you agree with me?
But seriously, this was not meant as a put-down of the TB2. Check out pictures of the RQ-7, the basic design (push propeller, triangular tail fins) is extremely similar and it has been around way longer than the TB2. The Turkish AF had RQ-7s in service, so once the US refused to sell them more drones, I could see how they'd put out a call for someone to build them a "better RQ-7". To me, it looks like Bayraktar took the boxy "prototype" design of the RQ-7 and updated it with better aerodynamic design, better motor, better (and non-sanctioned) electronics, better weapons, and probably easier-to-use software. To do that from scratch is an enormous achievement.
The shield existed long before the sword. A better analogy would of been the bow existing long before the shield, because the shields main function was to block projectile weapons, arrows/javelins/rocks from slings. This is why the shield was invented before any other piece of armor.
Would have* been
Honestly, I learned English as a second language, when I was already a teenager; of all the confusing things in the English language that can cause you to pick the wrong option, I do *not* understand _how_ people can mess up "have" with "of".
Please explain this mystery to me...!! 😆
(it's becoming so common that I expect it'll become officially recognized as "correct"💀)
@@MrNicoJacWho fckn cares if he made mistskes🤨? Do you like to brag that you know grammar or do you just like to get on everyone's nerves ? 🤔🙄
@@MrNicoJac no one cares
@MrNicoJac Even though you are correct, you're also lame af. I bet everyone hated you in school.
@@MrNicoJac not everyone learns the full scope of a second language, I hear it regularly. Even native English speakers use the wrong words often when they have a weak vocabulary.
TB2 is an amazing piece of equipment. Proven in Libya, Kaeabakh, Syria, and Ukraine
Love the TB-2. Its an entirely unspectacular mid-range cheap tactical drone option that everyone, even the Russians, have motivation to hype up. Real time, real-world example of how things like the T-34 or Tiger mythos came to be.
The AK-47 or Toyota Hilux of drones perhaps? Amazing utility at affordable price.
@@azure4100 I'd say more the Toyota Tercel or Kia Soul of tactical drones. Not gimmicky or anything, absolutely functional at its price, but certainly not a high level performer.
It is accurate to say that it is vastly superior to not having a tactical drone. It is also accurate to say that the TB-2 offers a lot of utility, and that the larger prices of US systems present diminishing returns for the prices as far as payload and such are concerned, but the more advanced and expensive systems have integrated capabilities that TB-2 isn't capable of providing.
So, its not just better than nothing. Its pretty dang good for what it is. But it lacks just as much as it has.
Yeah. While the AK and Hilux are amazing the T-34 was an utter piece of shit that caused death of so many crews that the Russians can't figure out how many even now.
@@HanSolo__ Agreed.The T34 was made to be CHEAP and easy and fast to produce, anything else didnt matter.Some were rolled out of the factory with the crew already in em.Ukraine is probably doing something similar now with some of the older crap nato sends,desperate measures require desperate solutions.The Tiger on the other hand since its mythos came up, was a very complicated expensive terrifying beast that broke down constantly.The PzIV and PzV were much better, that dont create hype, but work.
@@HanSolo__ AKs are _severely_ hit or miss, depending on where and when they were made. Ive personally fired 9 different AK derivatives and they were all crap stamped metal monstrosities made in the 70s or 80s in the western USSR. Ive been told about certain Chinese models that perform well and certain ones that don't. I've also been told that western machined models, especially early east german models, that are true champions. Overall, the AK reputation is more myth than reality, and the very best AKs are no better or worse than your most ordinary western counterparts.
Fascinating to see some technical detail on these weapons, and some discussion of their battlefield efficacy. I've watched several videos on the drone vs tank debate so far, and this one added a very useful perspective.
TB2 in Ukraine mostly used for searching and destroying antiaircraft on the march. Also its shooting supply/fuel trucks and mlrs. All that can multiply power of its rocket and destroy everything nearby.
Other option is to stop column before artillery strike.
thanks I'm glad I was able to add some useful information to the discussion
@@Taskandpurpose cannot wait for the newest episode on the Russian-Ukrainian War
What I find interesting is that intercepted Russian radio conversations seem to suggest that they assume that any time their position is compromised or that they are engaged by fire from an unknown source it is due to TB2s. Kinda like how US troops in WW2 called every German tank a Tiger and chalked up fire from every relatively light artillery piece on the battlefield from mortars up to light howitzers as fire from the 88 mm flak.
Clearly while the TB2 isn't "stealthy" as such, at least minimizing its radar cross-section was taken seriously in its design. And flying so slow may actually be an advantage. I'd bet that if you can get a radar cross section similar to that of a bird and you fly somewhere in the range of speeds that birds fly, that it might make engaging such an object more difficult.
The idea of developing the battlefield was one of the things I thought was brilliant about the XM360 + MRM-KE, that it would allow massing tank fire at beyond visual range using things like drones and unattended ground sensors to find targets.
turkish drone have proven their efficiency as a game changer not only in Ukraine but also in Libya where the Russian+emirates+Egyptian forces helped by the french army were defeated and pushed back off Tripoli in 2020-2021
The sustainable and continuous development process and the ecosystem created with the participation of other companies are the keys to this success. TB2 was the most lost in the Libya operation. Because it was alone and the concept of use was not yet settled. Then came the Syrian Idlib operation. Here, the TB2 and Anka drones performed very well. In fact, they were used almost like a swarm. Because they were under the protection of the most advanced Turkish Aselsan EW systems. I can say that they cut the Syrian army and Iran-backed Shiite militias like a crop.
Then came the Azerbaijan-Armenia war. They are involved here with a much more established ConOps. They also had the power of not only Turkish but Israeli "power multipliers" systems with them. When the intelligence of Turkey and Israel combined for the same purpose, it did great things. It would be pointless to talk about them.
Currently, Turkey has developed the micro EW Pod, which can also be used with light drones such as TB2, TB3, Anka. It's under testing. Of course, this will be followed by those produced for Akıncı and Aksungur unmanned vehicles, which are much heavier and more powerful systems. In other words, the enemies are faced with a system that is constantly changing and updated, even though its external appearance remains the same. For this reason, it becomes difficult to develop countermeasures. Because it is possible to define these systems as "Exponential".
China is an important drone exporting country. However, this country has a very, very bad track record in areas such as maintenance, support, and spare parts. However, if you obtain a Chinese drone in your own country with the co-production process approach, you have a sustainable system, albeit limited. If you buy it, you can only be happy for a year or two. It is very difficult to imagine additional development and change processes, even if you produce jointly. That's why TB2 is constantly rising in the market and is taking over countries that have worked with China in the recent past.
One thing that the TB2 has over Chinese drones is the excellent post-purchase customer service and support. They made all the difference in Azerbaijan and Ukraine.
They're only really seeing success because the Russians aren't deploying their mobile SAMs quick enough to provide proper coverage. As this video states, the drone's weakness is standard anti-air systems that have been long established. The Russians have poor air coverage discipline and their ground forces tend to drastically overextend beyond air coverage. The Russian Air Force has little to no experience or training in SEAD operations so they tend to get shot down a lot more and aren't very good at countering SAM systems, so they are tending to fly a lot less and only in areas pre-cleared by infantry or missile/rocket barrage. The Russians are mostly losing vehicles in areas they are newly pushing and haven't been able to saturate with missiles/rockets to clean out the Ukrainian SAMs littered about. This means their air force is relatively neutered and limited and wont fly out and get needlessly shot down some more. They should be deploying more of their mobile SAMs and keeping them relatively close to the front lines in order to properly cover their advancing ground forces. If the Russians are having this much issue with these Turkish drones, they'd have a hell of a lot harder time with the much more powerful and advanced U.S./NATO drones which have better optics, sensors, powerful engines with better range and altitudes and much larger payloads.
I would say they worked well In libya, seeing it turned the tide of battle there significantly. however, I agree that it wasn't used to its fullest potential, since there wasn't enough synergy between it and the forces on the ground.
@@Talishar Your point would be valid, if there weren't any videos of the TB2 taking on SAM systems with active radars. However, such videos exist, especially of BUK systems.
@@Talishar Better, stronger, higher, bigger, etc. Of course, they have importance. But.. Quantity has its own quality itself. All approach depends on who and how you look at them...
I've heard that the next "Force Multiplier" is going to be Ground Based Autonomous Drones. Heard that a small outfit called Skynet is field testing their T-800 even as we speak.😉
You might be joking but you're actually correct. The US is experimenting with unmanned ground vehicles.
Also UAV assisted artillery that locks multiple targets and kills many targets simultaneously. Then of course drone swarms, which is a bit scary.
@@scoutsden7193 Spurring development of laser and microwave weapons to knock out drone swarms and big UAVs
Wait to you see the T-1000
Awesome - the future looks bright!
Cappy, I think you've hit the nail on the head with where we are about having to rethink tactics. I think there will still be recon teams in the field, but they will be there to use drones to identify enemy positions which will be uplink targeting data via satellite.
Something else to consider: mines are stationary, but we may be entering a time when small, baseball-sized aerial mines come looking for you. That creeps me out.
I think its already being done by extremists in Syria by strapping a bomb with consumer drone
We already are in that time. What you described is basically the modern loiter ammunition, like the us made switchblade 'drone' (not 100% sure i remebered the name correctly)
@@reappermen your right
TB2 is kalashnikov of drones . cheap, easy to use, reliable and effective
To all the obsolete naysayers. The last war where tanks haven't been around for the most part was WW1. And no one has claimed that machine guns and artillery make the infantryman obsolete. ATGM's have been around for decades. The issue with the Ukraine war is that the Russians haven't taken note of the importance of combined arms operations. Their tanks being obsolete is also not their Achilles heel. Israel lost some of its most advanced tanks in 2006 to Hezbollah using Russian Kornet ATGM's. The lessons to be learned have been around for a while. The biggest issues with the Russian army is a lack of coordination between services and shoddy communication between units. As well as poor training, morale and a lack of dedicated NCO's.
If tanks were obsolete, you need ask what would replace it? Is there something that can efficiently offer the same mobility, firepower and protection capacity as a tank?
@ So in the Comment that you copied from the the other segment. Are you meaning to say plane and simple. Clean is not simply?
@@brylleabella7153 I've had someone tell me heliborne infantry is a solution, I nearly died from laughing. Are MANPADS not a thing? We've seen how a heliborne operation into contested airspace went for the Russians around Hostomel. Bottom line tanks are here to stay. They'll get better armor, active protection systems and if introducing an autoloader the 4th crewman can be tasked with operating a dedicated mini UAV to spot dangers and targets. Better AA systems to shot down or disrupt small drones will get introduced. And long term the Tank itself may become fully automated with a crew miles away if we can figure out the signals interference problem.
The problem is you can supply every infantry platoon with relatively cheap, accurate, and effective anti-tank weapons. Losing expensive tanks in a lopsided expense ratio. You could argue about environment, combined arms, and misutilization of tanks, but the role of tanks is being confined. In warfare you don't always fight in ideal situations. Evaluating tanks and possible replacement concepts should not be forbidden. You sound like a defender of battleships in era of aircraft and missiles. Perhaps tanks are on their way out, still have a niche role, or will have a Renaissance with the right tech.
@@commonman4413 Bullets cost pennies to make and can kill an infantryman equipped with thousands of dollars worth of equipment. An artillery round costs about $1500 bucks and can kill an entire platoon of men with a single impact. Yet we still spend an average of $1 million USD training and equipping a vulnerable piece of meat. You sir sound like a defender of humans in an era where the flesh is weak and robots do all the work.
2:07 That's not a TB1, that's the Akinci its even written on the body.
good catch thanks for that!
I used to give you a bit of a hard time in the past, but you've proven to be an excellent content creator. The amount of work you've put in to studying the NGSW and Future Soldier program so you can relay it to us in simple terms is commendable. And your continued analysis of the Russo-Ukraine war has been excellent.
Best military information channel I every seen. Keep up the good work.
Is a magic weapon which makes obsolete many other more expensive equipment? No, it however has performed way better than expected forcing everyone to rethink tactics, this is also a major boost for Turkish military industry.
Thanks for this explanations. Bayraktar is the real game changer.
I'm currently reporting from Ukraine and see the results of its' job on the field.
Why is it a game changer? The US has been using drones in the Middle-East for a very long time? Don't fall for the Turkish propaganda.
The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan was when the Bayraktar was first used by Azerbaijan forces with devastating effects against the Armenians. Apparently the Bayraktar destroyed $1.9 billion worth of military equipment.
The TB2 (and TAI Anka drone) was used in Syria earlier in 2020 against Assad's forces, and in Libya in 2019 against warlord Khalifah Hafter (backed by Egypt, UAE, France, Russia) who themselves used UAE-supplied Chinese-made _Wing Loong 2_ drones which completely flopped against the TB2. Turkey also used laser weapons to take down a WL2 drone in August 2019, which is the first documented use of anti-drone laser weapons in combat.
in Armenia Bayraktar is successful because Armenia armor columns don't have air defense systems. Armenian S300 destroyed by israeli drones thats why Bayraktar succeed
@@vishvajitkumar9497 those Russian air defense systems had a hard time spotting those Bayraktar drones to begin with
@@aburoach9268 S300 already destoyed by Isreali drones before using Bayraktar drones against armoured colums.
@@vishvajitkumar9497 Yes but the S300 wasn't the only thing the Armenians had / they also had Tors, Buks, Kubs, Stugs, Osa's, pechora's, weren't of much use against the TB2
Turkey produces a domestic weapon systems based on new technologies. Most of them have already been found by countries like the USA. However, Turkey does these things much cheaper with its own experience and knowledge, with domestic opportunities. Maybe it can do 80% of the capabilities of US weapons, but it is completely domestic. Most importantly, it significantly enlarges the arms industry.
America da olmayan teknolojiyi de üretiyoruz şu an haberin olsun.
Once anti-air systems get good at shooting down drones-- drones will be improved for SEAD missions to lure and destroy those same AA systems-- and it will go back and forth. Aerial drones will need to fly with SEAD drones or include their own counter laser-laser systems etc.
This is not something that will happen it is something that already exists. Look at IAI Harop and Harpy from Israel that is can operate as fully autonomous anti-radar weapons systems. They might be classified as loitering munition because of the way the attack destroys it and they can't land if not used. But it is still the same idea and you often hear Switchblade being called a suicide drone.
But drones for SEAD in combination with manned aircraft go back at least to the 1991 Gulf war when BQM-74 Chukar was designed as an areal target for training and ADM-141 TALD is designed a decoy missile was used to lure radar system that got destroyed by anti-radiation missiles from crewed crafts.
ADM-20 Quail is a decoy cruise missile that was deployed in 1960 on B-52 bombers to fool the air defense system so the bombers can get through.
As fas as I know, Türkiye(Turkey) amd Bayraktar is also working on a fighter drone which will also release several mini, decoy drones to lure enemy air defense systems. Another Turkish company is working on 5th gen fighter jet that will have the capacity of controlling several fighter drones. Air warfare is going crazy places.
I expect that we'll see a lot more anti-drone weapons in the future, from missiles, to emp weapons, to other suicide drones. That'll be helpful in protecting tank columns.
a solution already exists , its called an airforce
I will not say if you are right or wrong about the specifics but this is often the pattern of warfare. Once more effective counters are developed; Tank-like-vehicles will be back soon enough. They would be unmanned, among other updates..
@@AnimalMother207 is not really effective to shoot an air to air missile that cost 1 million a piece at drone worth of 20k.
Civialians zones and bases too.
After all, US uses for it spell "war crimes" all over.
9 of 10 death are colateral, that is not a number you want in civilian areas.
Sulemani's assasination alone exposes it.
5 iraqui force died and drones take of from Iraq, violating s treaty, so iraq cute ties with the US an begin negotiations with Russia.
EMP's can make Russia the most powerful army in the world... If all electronics are defeated after a big emp strike those old diesel tanks without electronics will be virtually unstoppable..
Heheheee
In keeping with the "The more things change, the more they stay the same" concept...the US Army found when fighting the Apache Indians that the best way to fight them was with other Apaches...hence the Apache Scouts. Well...maybe the best way to fight drones is with other drones. I agree that every army will from now on will have to pay more attention to its air defenses and air superiority is more important than ever. How the US implements air superiority in the future will determine the future viability of armored warfare.
I remember reading about potential 6th gen fighter planes, that would sync up with a squad of drones to accompany it. And/or be able to fly unmanned as well. As well as the idea of using advanced sensors to relay targeting info to other attackers, which we are already seeing with the F-35. Things are really changing fast.
@@shorewall True, the F-35 is already capable of monitoring and controlling multiple drones and it set up for the "Loyal Wingman" program. The F-35 can also double as an AWACs monitoring and directing other assets onto the target. Most people have little idea of just how capable the F-35 is...we're way ahead of everybody else in this aspect. The Air Force has already tested autonomous swarming drones that are deployed from C-130's or C-17's as well as drones that can be launched and recovered autonomously from same said aircraft.
"Why haven't we heard anything about them until now?" because U.S. media does not cover anything that credits Turkiye. Bayraktar Drones have been kicking ass, but they couldn't ignore it anymore when Ukrainians make songs about it.
The thing is you can't really rely on US or Western media. Unfortunately, TRT World and Turkish PR is really mediocre. They need to learn from English-language Indian media and PR. Even a channel like CRUX which just posts slideshows with text gets hundred of thousands of views. Indian media-just like US and Australian media-relies on emotion and spectacle. The English-language media from Turkey won't even talk about relevant things that need to be spread. Even I stopped watching TRT World because of how useless it was.
Drones certainly are a game changer. And as technology progresses, their effects will only be felt more and more on the Battlefield.
I think is over hyped. Been a while now but not so much news on tb2. Some are even from syria and karabakh wars. I could be wrong tho
@@karlyo6937 tb2 used to attack the tanks which got seperated from their armored columns tb2 is overhyped it was used by azerbaijan after all the major air defence system were neutralised . it is only useful for countries which dont have strong enemies
yes if you can keep a pace with production in last 3 weeks it is hard to find footage of Ukrainian drone hits from Ukrainian side simply cuz Russia Tor sytem is best aa against drone in the world,they have pantsir aswell but it is not that good,in Libia sucked ass but Tor is a beast,Russians decimate them,at battle of Izum they knocked 12 of them during one day,last time Ukranian Transport plane go to Turkey to get new Bariaktars was 3 weeks ago..simply Turkey can not produced them that fast..
@@noname-mk7hp exactly. So overhyped.
I don't completely agree with you, drones right now has effectiveness at it's peak but it may start to recess, soon tanks are going to be outfitted with hard kill active protection systems they can shoot down incoming missiles. Right now they are in limited numbers, assuming you are mentioning tanks.
The "old" US Predator (piston powered) drone is about the same size as the TB2. The Predator was replaced by the Reaper (turbine engine, much more capability) as Field Admiral Cappy mentions.
Well there are bigger and more capable drones in the Turkish inventory
@@radonsider9692 Agreed. I was just trying to add detail to Cappy's description of TB2 versus Reaper.
@@jimmiller5600 oh sorry. Btw the TB-1 photo shown here is the newer Akıncı comparable to Reaper
@@radonsider9692 - Let's no overdo the praise of Turkey, a country with a mere six satellites. Erdogan has been killing his country's economy for years.
@@SilvanaDil satellites are important but we are talking something other than that you know. And yes he is killing the economy with his stupid decisions about economy
If one was listening to the Armenians concerning the Azeri-Armenia war, then you would have heard plenty about these drones along with loitering munitions in general. There is a documentary on this Azeri-Armenia war and how much it has changed the nature of warfare, so yes its a big deal and a game changer when deployed en mass.
Plenty of combat footage courtesy of Azerbaijan from the drones's or bomb's/rocket's perspective blowing up men in a foxhole or an uncamouflaged vehicle like an arcade game.
No one really took that conflict seriously because it was just assumed Armenia is a backwater nation which terrible military training. No one really looked twice with Azerbaijan ran over them with a steamroller either.
But perhaps we should have paid more attention, these drones were probably the major difference.
Yeah Azeris used both Turkish and Israeli drones to effect. Having said that, the Russian army is more advance than Armenia and I don't think Ukraine has Harop drones nor the same amount of TB2s as Ukraine. So I think the Russians may have under-estimated the TB2.
@@williamdavis9562 Most ordinary civilians didn't, but military all around the world paid a lot of attention to it and learned from it.
@@realtalk6195 That is probably true. Nagorno Karabakh for all intents and purposes looked like an impossible area to invade.
Full of mountainous terrain and littered with tons of heavy Russian equipment.
This new military doctrine the Azeris used probably shocked a lot of military experts around the world.
Congrats on your continued success Mr Cappy
Over30 years ago I was involved with the development and operation of a High Altitude - Long Endurance (HALE) Unmanned Air Vehicle (UAV). At this point I'm willing to predict air warfare is going to be directed more towards remote controlled aircraft. Eventually, remote controlled aircraft won't be able to respond fast enough for threat avoidance so the air vehicles will start integrating artificial intelligence systems. Sadly, the arms race never slows down, it just grows another arm.
I think that very soon, countermeasures against drone usage will come into play. We're already seeing telltale signs of it, in the form of the new Israeli active defense system that uses a laser. Among its target list are drones.
Hi Chris.
As an Aussie Vietnam vet, (Ex Armour), I find myself inexorably drawn to conflicts still.
Something of a "moth to a flame", love-hate scenario.
It's hard to let go of, even after all this time...
Anyhoo!! I wanted to thank you sincerely for you insightful & informative content & analysis, without all the proliferating bullshit often found, & especially now, re this conflict.
So, thanks again, & please keep up the good work.
Civilian killer
Veteran sir, have you watched the movie "The Hurt Locker"? So it's true/realistic? Near the end of the movie how the charracter's normal peace time was mundane to the point of being out of place for him? It was almost implied that he wanted to go back to the warzone. Or, tell us more about your experience. As a gamer who loves guns and stuff, but am socially awkward and a pushover in many situations (as I always expect people to be reasonable, but they arent and I always get fucked over), so Im effectively a pacifist, even though I want to be powerful. What's it like to actually wield life ending power? Or. Well. If that question is weird, then Im trying to say, I got curious about your story, if you feel like sharing more. From a psychological point of view I guess.
@@KashmirEmpireof5000years ah yes being a Vietnam vet automatically makes him a civilian killer. Do everyone a favor and stfu please
anyone wondering if tanks are obsolete, go and watch the video made by Chieftain. its a very thorough, level headed and concise answer
I’m a light fighter, the main reason these armored vehicles are getting chewed up is the lack of ground troop support. Tanks alone a just big targets.
This is even more important when armor is operating in cities, in this case ground troops advance and clear building and obstacles in front of the armor.
True but I have seem Russian tanks get taken out from 3-4 kms how do you protect against that with infantry?
@@EatMyShortsAU you send out patrols and recon screens, in advance of the movement. It’s not a perfect system but it does work.
@@patrickdevine1085 Fair enough.
@@EatMyShortsAU the smaller drones such as the switchblade still have to have an operator and a launch site within striking distance. The reason the Russians are having a difficult time pinning down the Ukrainians is because the Ukrainians are doing just that screening their strike teams by sending in scouts to pinpoint the Russian positions and targets. Then the AT teams move in strike and beat feet.
@@patrickdevine1085 Lol does Russia even have AWACS out there like that?
Imagine a weird future where military conflicts are just drones and robot things fighting each other while gamers from each country sit behind computers sending each other memes and having a drink while on discord calls, or proximity chats for the robots.
Don't forget the soldiers would be just weekend warriors because the fighting job is outsourced to the highest bidder: MEGACORPORATIONS! Seriously, this would make corporations our feudal lords.
Well I know this is going to sound bad but I am glad it is the Armenians, Russian and Syrian soldiers dying and not Turkish, Azeri and Ukrainians. If I had to choose between being a driver of a rusty T-72 or a pilot of modern TB2 I think I know which I would choose.
@@Joshua_N-A *ahem* Blackwater
The TB2 is like the V1 in WW2, cheap, can be intercepted but is effective enough to do the job and to be procured in significant numbers.
For me Tb2 more like Fairey Swordfish. Slow,underestimated but deadly.
I highly recommend the book "Rainbows End" by Vernor Vinge. This book has a fantastic concept for use of drones to control the physical and electromagnetic space of a combat zone. (It's also the book that inspired many of the engineers that did the original work on augmented reality.)
Is that a novel?
@@alexseguin5245 yes, it's a "near future" sci-fi novel. Very creative / insightful story about integration of current technology into life and combat.
Haven't read that one, but Vernor Vinge is really good. The whole Zones of Thought series is one of my favorites. Telepathic quasi-hivemind dog aliens, godlike AI taking over entire star clusters, it's great.
@@roblangada4516 yes, his stuff is very good in general. Rainbows End is a little different in that it's set in-near future with more realistic technology. His story writing makes seeing the implications/applications of the tech very vivid.
Tb2s effectiveness is proven when you consider its capability in not just Ukraine but in Nagorno Karabakth and Syria as well. They cause much more harm than they recieved. They are small and slow. Therefore, hard to detect. They operate around 25kft therefore, no laser beam could reach to harm drones. Even if they somewhat attacked, they could provide location info of attacker for artillary strikes. They are simply force multiplier. When you come close to adversary air space, your adversary mostly has to fly its fighter jet to defend its airspace. Also, do not forget that flying swarms of drones (like tb2 in syria) is the new doctrine in the battlefield which tb2 users could adopt by training which boost their tactical advantage further.
One advantage I've heard regarding the TB2 vs Wing Long 2 are the larger percentage of carbon fiber used and smaller size of the TB2. This was probably not intentional, but part of Turkish effort to keep costs down. Unintentionally, the TB2 leaves a smaller radar signature in comparison. One Wing Long was downed by Turkish laser in Libya, where as the TB2 was probably not worth the same effort for the LNA.
laser ??
@@sapitron Yes welcome to the 21st century, laser weapons are a thing now & the US aren't the only ones with them.
@@sapitron
th-cam.com/video/iH-MhCvJJHw/w-d-xo.html
It's a big RC plane, for heavens sake. The next step is counter-drone technology that targets the radio links. Then what? Well, then you take that damn $10k radio out of the drone and you put a $50 AI in that finds its own targets. It's not exactly hard to identify a 50 ton piece of hulking metal and to kamikaze dive on it, right? Now the cost goes down from roughly $5 million to $5000, so you can afford 1000 tank killing loitering munitions for the price of one large drone. The enemy will hardly be able to shoot them down with $1 million missiles designd for $100 million planes. So now they have to design tiny drone swarms that can take your loitering munitions out. At that point the human soldier is simply BBQ meat in a war between smaller and smaller machines.
There is some serious electronic eq. On this drone for emagnetic attacs. Not a simple RC…
@@pointblank722 That's the problem. You are investing absolutely unnecessary RF electronics and targeting optics in a million dollar design that delivers explosives for a couple thousand bucks. Why???? All you want is the boom, which means that the delivery system shouldn't cost an arm and a leg. The design philosophy comes from people who are used to building extremely complex manned fighter jets. It should instead come from artillerists. Shoot that thing close enough to the enemy that it can find a target, get within ten feet and then just explode the heck out of it. And then you don't shoot one at a time but hundreds. There is no defense against that.
@@schmetterling4477 loitering munitions can't effectively do recon or artillery spotter with their cheapskate radio. A traditional artillery warhead is still way cheaper than a one-off use drone.
@@schmetterling4477 Fine idea, but this platform does way more than just drops a bomb.
Small drones *cannot* loiter for long. It's a couple hours at best. The smaller you go, the shorter the flight time.
It is silly to call this a force multiplier when it is just a very efficient weapon system.
A force multiplier is equipment that makes a lot of other systems more effective.
true it's a bit of a stretch! I meant that the TB2 has ability to do surveillance and to coordinate artillery strikes makes it a "force multiplier" if an MRE can be called a force multiplier I think we can extend it to drones haha
It can designate targets for laser guided artillery shells something that makes it a force multiplier.
It able to do the job of multiple units at once. That being recon, artillery spotter, and anti-vehicle roles. This improves the effectiveness of artillery and improves battlefield awareness for troops along with their anti armor capabilities. I think this counts as multiplying the effectiveness of ground forces.
“a” and “lot” are two separate things lol. A lot of words that people mispell are in fact two separate gramatical, syntaxical entities. 🧐 However, I shall allot you a portion of inadvertent misspellages and/or word usages, for your daily allotment, as these darned phone keyboards can certainly be frustrating at times. - Sincerely, Grammar “Nancy”
Target designation, ISR, Artillery and Rocket projector correction, etc...
FYI @2:08 this image does not show Bayraktar TB1. It's Akıncı (Raider) which is a new product produced by Baykar.
The important thing is that in the artillery spotting role it never actually exposes itself to enemy anti air because it only needs to fly high enough to have the enemy over the horizon, the high powered optics do the rest. If it flies up to its 5500m operational altitude, the horizon is around 260 km away. It can stand *far* behind friendly ground units & inside the range of friendly SAM sites and still provide a useful spotting role.
Any SAM missile that can hit it from 200km away is going to be way more expensive than the TB2, has to be fired from a platform that costs half a billion dollars, and will be visible to the drone due to the trail from the missile. So if Russia shoots down the 5M TB2 with heavy duty systems like these, they expose a 500M platform to enemy cruise missiles.
In some ways this is nothing new since air recon has generally been good at this, but drones being cheap with long loiter time, combined with the rise of networking and smart weapons that can target instantly based on information that comes from a spotter, makes the drones plus artillery combo very powerful.
Then ofc there is the separate idea of loitering munitions like the switchblade which are an entirely separate revolution and sort of combine tactical spotting/target aquisition with the role of man-portable mortars, except they are also way more accurate than the latter.
Yeah, I really don't think that Ukraine has any cruise missiles and even if they did, they'd have terrible accuracy on top of it being doubtful whether they could even counter-battery it in time.
Don't over estimate the optics. The cannot see much from 100km due to dirt in atmosphere. This is why TB2s fly low for observation mission - when you see videos of artillery strikes you see them from a drone just above, not 100km away.
@ they have tochka u's.. like russia has iskanders (though id rather have iskanders)
tanks STILL fill a vital role in the military, and just like how the average infantryman, is vulnerable to machine gun fire, but still exists today. vulnerable to manpads or drones isn't enough to take away the tanks speed. nothing is faster at putting fire down range, not rockets not morter teams, nothing is faster, and tanks can do burm drills, and they have videos of tanks firing, getting into cover, before a rocket can reach them in time, just shows you the speed and importance of tanks.... it's still here, and will fill a role for many years
@@paulrichardspencer russian tanks are stabilized wdym
ORC cookers
@@paulrichardspencer can you link a source please
This reminds me of an article I read about monitoring systems that could be placed in farm fields and detect specific insects that damage crops and shoot a laser to kill them - which then reminds me how technology developed for war can be reapplied for other societal purposes
My friend Jordin Kare (passed away now) developed a system that would shoot down mosquitos with a laser, and identified mosquitoes vs. other insects by the wingbeat frequency.
@@Rocketsong Just looked looked it up. I would guess that the technology I read about was partly influenced by Jordin's work. They were also able to determine the gender of the mosquito by wing beat speed. Any idea why the idea did not make it to fruition? It seems like it would theoretically be a novel solution to Malaria, Zika, etc. compared to the expensive genetic modification experiments they are trialing
Always level headed and objective. Excellent channel, keep it up.
Not objective not true all lie if he is true why ukraine don’t use mq9 they refuse to use it it’s not stealth either
One small missing aspect is that some components for the TB2 are actually made in Ukraine. A mutual agreement allowed them to order and purchase the first drones before conflict started and aquire subsequent precontracted drones afterwards.
The engines were ukrainian
Rotax 912 is made in Austria.
TB2s has a domestic engine TEI.PD. Don’t you know to Sanctions and Embargos to Turkiye.Old TB2s versions has a Rotax engine.Current Bayraktar TB2’s parts are %95 made in Turkiye.For example,new version TB2’s use to domestic Aselsan CATS( electro optical censor cameras) instead of Canadian products.Because Canada joined to West Sanctions and Embargos to Turkiye,But turks made more quality and effective than Canadian product.
Spot on about your points on the "Is the tank obsolete?" question. A big gun on a mobile platform is unlikely to be obsolete any time soon, but what people are noticing is that when facing a modern military with strongly networked forces, good battlefield surveillance, and cheap, powerful anti-tank firepower both on the ground and in the sky, the tank is becoming obsolete for certain roles. The old fantasy of tank platoons punching through the enemy line and rampaging through their logistics is basically impossible if your enemy is anywhere near parity, and against weaker enemies there are safer ways to achieve the same goals. Likewise, the role of the tank in providing a rapid response to breakthroughs has been largely replaced by fixed and rotor-wing aircraft and drones.
In a similar manner, many of the tank's fire support roles have been supplanted by the proliferation of infantry fighting vehicles and precision guided munitions from artillery or aircraft. The question is, how small is/should/will be the role of the tank in modern militaries going forward? How often will a tank be of more use than an equivalently priced IFV, UAV, or guided artillery system? How will the technology of the tank evolve to fight against obsolescence? Active protection systems? Drone tanks? Directed energy weapons?
Good resume.
If there is anything most at risk of facing total obsolescence, it would be manned aircraft. Such a attack helicopters, CAS, and multirole fighters. They are one of the most expensive weapon systems in the war and have resulted in nearly zero impact in the war effort.
@@Frenchfrys17 That's partly because the Russians have poor SEAD doctrine and equipment, and also lack the necessary precision weapons. Were the Russians capable of covering their strikes and able to conduct precision bombing at a high tempo, they'd be death from above. When you're dropping unguided bombs and you're afraid of the very few S-300s still active, yeah you won't be pulling your own weight.
I'll add another point in that last part and it's perhaps the most overlooked. Advancement of metallurgy and other materials. While still technically in the iron age, we no longer use raw iron as the common building material but use it to make steel, which is stronger, more flexible and durable. Manganese alloy was the main material to create helmets back during both world wars and also for flak jackets, but now Manganese has been replaced with Kevlar cause the latter became easier to manufacture, became lighter, and more efficient to use than the former.
In short, once the technology catches up, the metals and materials we use will be replaced or modified with something that has greater hardness and tensile strength.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The main issue is that drones have been shown to be more effective than manned aircraft while also being much cheaper as well. If you look at the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, neither Armenia or Azerbaijan used manned aircraft after the initial stages of the conflict. And that's because drones were just better, even picking off multi layered air defense systems themselves.
There are some inherent design advantages to the TB2 drone. It likely has a low radar cross section due to it being mostly made of plastic, and it moves slowly in that it's potentially much harder for it to be picked out of the "ground clutter". Faster moving drones may be more easily be picked up by MTI "Moving target indicator" radar, and will likely have a larger radar cross section.. Smaller drones may be harder to target, as they require higher frequency radars, but the atmospheric & water-vapor attenuation is greater for high frequency radar . Satellite uplinks are another factor that can greatly extend their range. The use of "star-link" networks that give then an internet connection can make them much more impervious to jamming,.
Most of the people dont understand how radars are working. Radars has some filters. There are significant parazytes on radar when high freqeuencies tracking from weather conditions to bird swarns reflections etc... Radars uses filters to eleminate these parazytes. TB2 has carbonfiber structure small engine, special tale design, narrow geometry, radar absorber paint. They all help for very small radar echo. Also it may fly very slow. So for radar operator it is difficult to identify if it is a drone or few ducks are flying above. Because anti air missiles are not cheap stuff to spend. Who fire anti air missiles he must be very sure that it is a drone. Because after spending anti air missile against nothing is not acceptable in any army.
So many people dont understand it is hard to detect.
Also Turkey use TB2 with Koral Electronic Warfare system. Turkey cleaned half of Syrian Army in just 3 days. Because Turkey use 50-100 bayraktars in network centric doctrine. When it is possible to blind enemy radars completely tb2 turns to terminator.
For now in Ukraine they use it carefully.
Also Turkish operators know how to attack russian air defence systems better.
Turkisj TB2 s has self electronic warfare systems and satellite control.
@@darkprofile wouldnt it be cool if Turkey developed the first solar powered battery driven drones… low heat profile, more silent and even faster on demand.. I dont think drones has to be Quick during a detect and hunt missions… but sometimes to be able to unleach more speed if needed.. lets say 400-600km/h
@@MY-fv5dw Not possible today. Solar power panels are not efficient enough. And the batteries to save energy are also mot efficient and heavy.
When we will be able to find a light weight and efficient electric storage technology it will be the end of man powered wars. Robots and Drones will be self sufficient and autonomous if there will be efficient energy suplly.
very simplistic way of presenting the TB2 !
Tanks and drones could probably work in coordination with each other one day. Eventually replacing more expensive gunship and other aircraft. The drones can either designate targets for tank turrets to fire, doing reconaissance, or kill enemy drone nearby to provide air support.
Smaller drones are even more important as spotters for artillery (with or without laser guidance) they are used to great effect by Ukraine, destroying far more than TB2.
Crowdsourced drones are flooding into ukraine, it's clear that every unit wants one for the overwatch and recon they can provide.
Reminds me of a video I saw where ordinary civilians used small drones (DJI - Mavic) to scout for Russian tanks and camps, relay the coordination to the artillery unit on the drone's location and clean them out. Because they are so small and nearly silent (too high in the sky to detect their propeller's sound) they are extremely useful and deadly on the battlefield.
@@GothicDragonX the dji drones were relaying ukrainian positions to russians bc they have a CCP backdoor built into them
Kristof create and use in a war after we can speak if not just shut your mouth
The Drone is no more effective at attacking tanks than a manned aircraft is. The benefits are that it's cheaper and less costly to operate in terms of logistics, manpower and support (including airfield), not that it's more effective. Compare a TB2 to an MI-35. If a force has ineffective air protection, they are vulnerable to air attack. That hasn't changed since WW1 and the drone hasn't made any impact on that fundamental paradigm. All the drone has done is change the parameters of the same fight that has always been there. With air supremacy, drones have zero impact. Without air supremacy, does it matter whether it's a drone or an Apache that's shooting missiles at you?
Because you can launch that drone as a suicide mission. As long as the target is more expensive
Exactly, people keep forgetting 'suicide drones" are basically cheap glorified ATGMs or the more recent loiter munitions (which everyone calls a drone now). And Larger drones like TB2 are pretty much the same as manned light aircrafts, just cheaper and perhaps less maintenance intensive. Not to say they aren't a good addition, just over hyped.
There is one tiny advantage. They are unmanned, so they don't mind flying super risky or suicidal missions. People not so much.
Irrelevant comment. It is the most effective tool they have.
Not exactly correct. The TB2 is highly mobile system. The command truck is mobile and the drone it self can be carried on trailer
Realistically, all you need is 3 trucks to support it. the command truck, one carry fuel and parts and one carry weapons and additional equipment
Now truth be told, its mobililty comes at the cost of payload but tactics can work around that
Thank you for compiling this information.
Finally,
I bet if this was a US drone you'd praise it day and night.
TB2 proved itself over and over again and not just in Ukraine
Funny how they insult it as cheap and slow in article praising it.
@@mikemikeson9927 cheap and slow is actually what made them so effective. They're cheap meaning they're affordable and they're slow meaning they won't show up on a regular as much.
With regards to the speed of the TB2 I think you kind of missed the point. Its slow flight is its advantage. Radars miss the slow flying small drones.
I wish more young people would do something like serve our military before becoming a content creator. You clearly got a lot of valuable experiences from your time that have given your voice more honesty and authenticity. Cheers to you sir
3:06 my favourite scene of Chris Cappy until now . . .