11 Reasons FPVs Are Better than Bombs, Missiles, or Artillery

There goes the military industrial complex!

In October I went on a mission with Ukrainian troops to the front lines, near Robotyne on the southern front. They were not worried about artillery or snipers—they were worried about Russian FPV drones. If you haven't heard of FPV (first person view) drones, then run, don't walk, to YouTube.  These fast, cheap, maneuverable, and effective (also extremely Chinese—parts wise) drones are taking over the war in Ukraine. Zelensky said that he wants Ukraine to build a million drones in 2024, and most of these will be FPV. Why? Because they work.  

1. Cost. Let's get the obvious one out of the way. FPVs cost about $1000, including the explosive part. Pick any system on the battlefield—no contest. Sorry Raytheon, Lockheed, Boeing, BAE, you'll have to lobby your way out of the DoD buying these at almost no margin. Perhaps you can argue that the Chinese are monitoring us through 3-D printed rotor blades.

2. Accuracy. I'm not talking about the probability of hitting an object. I'm talking about hitting a tank or IFV (infantry fighting vehicle) right between the turret and the hull, from the back. FPVs can turn almost 90 degrees, in any direction. Any half-trained 19-year-old who grew-up with Call of Duty or Fortnight probably has the skills to execute these maneuvers. This technology is problematic for Soviet armor with questionable ammunition storage designs, because the secondary explosions are dramatically permanent for the vehicle and crew. Oh, did I mention you can't outrun FPV drones? It's a major advantage over bombs or artillery when trying to hit a moving enemy.  

3. Maneuverability. One of the main purposes of digging bunkers and trenches is that bombs and artillery have shrapnel that explodes upwards. FPV drones can fly into bunkers and trenches. These drones can enter buildings through the front door, take a left in the living room, and go down the stairs. They can hit tanks in full-defilade (completely hidden in a dugout), something only top-detonating ATGMs (anti-tank guided missiles) like NLAWs and Javelins can accomplish. That's fine if you have line-of-site to the hole, but what if that tank is on the opposite side of a building? The maneuverability of FPVs negates much of the problem of enemies hiding behind cover.

4. Coordination of Fires. FPVs don’t require coordination of fires. The FPV pilot can be right next to the radio talking to the track commander assaulting the trench. There is no need to relay information from the forward observers to the artillery battery or from the Tactical Air Control Party to CAS (close air support) aircraft. The FPV pilot sees what’s happening on the ground.

5. Proximity. Close communication with assaulting forces, accuracy, and small explosion-radius allow FPVs to be used in proximity to infantry before and during an assault. This technique becomes more effective than 155mm artillery, mortar fire, or CAS to keep the enemy’s head down prior to and during the attack. No more WWI rolling barrages. No more waiting for that A-10 to be on station. FPVs can constantly keep the enemy in their holes or hit the infantry right around the next bend in the trench. It brings new meaning to "on my position!"

6. Exposure To Returning Fire. Shooting an armor vehicle with an ATGM is a dangerous operation because you are letting everyone know where you are. Even at near max range, firing a Javelin or NLAW may leave a contrail path that could give away your position. The indigenously produced Ukrainian Stugna-P ATGM is laser guided, so the launch tube needs to stay stationary (and exposed) until the missile contacts the target. Shooting at a BMP with a Carl Gustaf (at 500 meters) or an RPG (200 meters) at close range is an even dicier proposition. It is much better to be flying an FPV from the comfort of a stairwell or even behind a tree.

7. Conducting ISR. FPVs can conduct ISR (intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) while loitering or while enroute to a target. Advantage: FPV.    

8. Logistics. There's a saying in military and strategic studies that goes something like amateurs write newsletters, experts talk logistics. Bombs and artillery are heavy because they must contend with circular error probable (the degree to which they will be off the center of the target) when creating effects, thus they need a lot of explosive and shrapnel. The Stugna-P needs a three-person crew and weighs over 200 pounds. A Javelin is much lighter (at almost 50 pounds) but takes up a lot of space on the back of an infantryman. An FPV drone weighs next to nothing and fits in a cargo pocket.  

9. Reusability. If you don’t find your target, you can return to base. Depending on what kind of munition they’ve duct-taped to it, they’ll probably need to catch it in their hands as the FPV is landing. Obviously, the Ukrainians hate doing this, because it could blow your face off.

10. Ubiquity. On the battlefield right now, if you move during the day you’re going to be seen and targeted. There are so many drones flying around the Ukrainians in the field call it Boryspil, referencing Kyiv’s (formerly international) airport. If there eventually becomes millions of drones in theater, at what point does it turn warfare into assured destruction? How will that change battlefield calculus knowing before you even leave the assembly area that your armored column is going to be destroyed? It makes the difference between “Inshallah, if it’s my time, it’s my time” and “I’m definitely going to die.” Death is a strong deterrent.

11. Modularity. This technology is just getting started. Most of the FPVs on both sides use state of the world technology, mostly parts from China. As research and development begin to improve FPVs, we are going to see some incredible capability. Also, each main component on the FPV is fairly modular and interchangeable. If you want to put a thermal imager on it, go ahead. Larger battery? Just plug it in. Need your FPV to hold your beer? Just 3-D print it. Soon we will see FPVs created for specialized purposes: swarming, anti-personnel, anti-drone, etc. Also, in the future we will see faster FPVs engage helicopters.

No, the FPV drone is not the ultimate wunderwaffe, there are some downsides. Sometimes you just need a really big boom (aka a bomb). Missile effects are nearly instantaneous (great for starting ambushes) and can engage helicopters now. While FPVs are currently vulnerable to electromagnetic interference (EMI) and terrain masking, the transition from analog to digital telemetry, video, and control links, and advances in artificial intelligence and autonomy will decrease the FPV’s vulnerability to jamming. Regardless, the quad-genie has flown out of the bottle and these drones are a powerful threat with which every military must now contend. It’s impossible to imagine what the Ukrainians, innovators by necessity that they are, will do next.