this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2024
40 points (97.6% liked)
Ukraine
8414 readers
687 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
πΊπ¦ Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
π»π€’No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
π₯Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
π·Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human involved must be flagged NSFW
β Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam (includes charities)
- No content against Finnish law
π³π₯ Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
π³βοΈβοΈ Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
πͺ π«‘ Volunteer with the International Legionnaires
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
you'd be surprised how when your life depends on it certain engineering challenges become easier to prioritize. i'm not saying this weapon is more advanced than the other four countries. i'm just saying Ukraine may have made compromises the other countries would have considered jank ass bullshit that out in the field for Ukraine have been successful enough for what they need to do even with considerable downsides
I'm not sure how many shortcuts you can make with such sophisticated tech like lasers. Afaik all those "small" mobile ground models are around 30-50 KW and I'd assume you cannot go too much further below that without drastically affecting the actual effectiveness against a target. At some point they just become too weak to actually destroy anything within a feasible time, if at all.
It could be as simple as a longer cool down time between shots.
Made up numbers but let's say a US prototype could hit 5 targets a minute due to heating problems, maybe the Ukraine one is 1 per minute.
That's still 1 less expensive missle used per shot.