I wonder why this didn't happen sooner! I've been expecting it for four years, it seems. It's been ridiculously inefficient to have to destroy a drone just to take out another.

Next up, super-maneuverable drones semi-autonomously zig-zagging to close in, then lunging and ramming other drones' propellors with a tiny shield to break them, without ammo limitations. But that's probably gonna becomes feasible only after this war ends.

[–] LaFinlandia@sopuli.xyz 13 points 5 days ago

I started seeing shotgun drones in Jan 2025.
https://sopuli.xyz/post/20750177

Net launchers are becoming more common too.

Some drone interceptors just have a stick. https://sopuli.xyz/post/41069897

[–] abrasiveteapot@sh.itjust.works 12 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm not a Ukrainian drone designer, but at a guess: weight and cost.

Recoilless shotguns arent just pulling the stock off your grandpa's shottie. They have a specific gas chamber design that is specific (ie not cheap to buy). They're also not light so the drone has to be able to lift it.

Heavier drones like that werent widely available initially - UA were just getting in as many DJI drones from China as they could lay their hands on. Now they are making their own they can adapt the design to different uses.

Also using a low cost quad drone to kamikaze another drone was probably cheaper than specialist ones to shoot them down.

[–] Grabthar@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I'd expect also because having your drone tech in thousands of pieces when its finished is probably a desirable thing. Reuseable may be environmentally friendly, but it lets the enemy follow you home and halves your range too.

[–] abrasiveteapot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago

Good point.

(I was going to make a hammer reference but I figure that's probably worn thin.)

[–] bluGill@fedia.io 1 points 4 days ago

The real advantage to something like this is the drone you flew for 10 minutes to reach the enemy can take out 1-2 drones with the shotgun, then destroy itself taking down a third, while a drone that only takes down one enemy drone means 10 more minutes getting the next to that area.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

I saw a video a while ago of a stabilized drone hunting other stabilized drones. This looks like fpv vs fpv which is a big step up in terms of skill and utility.

[–] thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe 6 points 5 days ago

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2025/03/11/ukraines-elegantly-simple-recoilless-shotgun-drone/

I wonder why this didn't happen sooner!

The challenge of recoil I gather

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 days ago

I've been posting this for years. At close to medium range, a flying sawed off shotgun with buckshot is pretty devastating.

[–] wltr@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I think the ideal scenario is when you do not destroy the other drone, but take full control of it. Or just take it down (or with you, depending on the location), and at the very least repurpose it for parts for your own drones.

Otherwise very much agree.

[–] zabadoh@ani.social 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

That depends on what kind of drone it is.

If it's a cheap kamikaze drone laden with explosives that might detonate before you can disarm it, then no.

If it's an expensive high quality DJI with high resolution cameras and thermal vision, then maybe.

Bringing in a live drone that can be tracked or even just viewed through the camera might reveal your location to the enemy, and attract enemy suicide drones.

[–] wltr@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 4 days ago

Great observation, I didn’t think of it!

[–] NoSpotOfGround@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I didn't event think of that... True, that is even better.