Comment Re:Armed Drone Swarms (Score 2) 103
It's a fair point, but also keep in mind the target - A $100,000 anti-missile missile system does more than stop $1000 rockets - it stops $1000 rockets from taking out potentially multiple millions of equipment, which itself might have very high economic differentials - e.g., the target saved may itself be say a piece of field artillery lobbing $2,000 155mm shells taking out $2,000,000 tanks for example. There is also a situational or time component - spending $100k to stop a $1k rocket might be well justified if that is providing cover to an advancing force or spearhead. Or just the possibility may make rocket attacks futile to the point they don't continue to happen.
Watching drones in the Ukraine conflict feel new in terms of economic imbalance, but propose it is not really. Consider a 5.56mm bullet is just shy of a buck (say). To impose a combat injury or fatality which takes an enemy off the field takes say about 2,000 bullets by some estimates - roughly $2k per soldier downed. The cheapest investment in conscripts I could find is still ~$3k investment, a US soldier, $25k in direct basic training costs - or, if in theatre, well over $500k with indirect deployment costs. Or the cost of a lifetime of economic potential. However you cut it, bullets are cheap relative to the life it can take. It's really just the same calculus.
That said, lobbing missiles at drones and drones at ships, the overall point certainly stands - there is a strong economic advantage to the powers whom are able to effectively and efficiently deploy (and/or counter) such cheap systems.
Watching drones in the Ukraine conflict feel new in terms of economic imbalance, but propose it is not really. Consider a 5.56mm bullet is just shy of a buck (say). To impose a combat injury or fatality which takes an enemy off the field takes say about 2,000 bullets by some estimates - roughly $2k per soldier downed. The cheapest investment in conscripts I could find is still ~$3k investment, a US soldier, $25k in direct basic training costs - or, if in theatre, well over $500k with indirect deployment costs. Or the cost of a lifetime of economic potential. However you cut it, bullets are cheap relative to the life it can take. It's really just the same calculus.
That said, lobbing missiles at drones and drones at ships, the overall point certainly stands - there is a strong economic advantage to the powers whom are able to effectively and efficiently deploy (and/or counter) such cheap systems.