There is no relevant distinction to make anywhere in one time use systems, which is another way of stating that the belief people have that drones will replace all larger aircraft and make them obsolete aggressively ignores that larger aircraft already frequently carry much more agile, cheap and decisive counters to smaller drones, they are called missiles.
Another way of stating the above truth is that many of the “drone” interceptors Ukraine has fielded to great success could just be as easily be conceptualized as small, affordable electric prop powered guided missiles as they can be conceptualized as drones. Similarly one could conceptualize a fiber optic FPV drone as an evolution of TOW missiles into a more flexible, affordable complimentary form.
The idea that missiles are inherently more expensive than larger drones they are meant to neutralize is also a major thinking error caused by misunderstanding the ways in which the US is dysfunctional and also the basic doctrine the US Military follows. A smaller more limited missile will always be cheaper to produce than a larger more complex flying bomb, the fact that the world has temporarily become delusional about this is going to blow back in the faces of people very violently who confidently believe incorrect things about war because they understand drones and computers…
The only real meaningful distinction that can be made between most missiles and most drones is that most smaller missiles are employed to hit moving targets whereas most long range flying bombs like shaheds are optimized for dispersed static targets. That isn’t a hard distinction of course though (tiny fpv drones are a major exception here) so I just usually resort to calling them all flying bombs. A tomahawk is VERY different than a shahed, but they both fall under the category of “Flying Bomb” to me.
When does it stop being a drone and is instead a missile?
There is no relevant distinction to make anywhere in one time use systems, which is another way of stating that the belief people have that drones will replace all larger aircraft and make them obsolete aggressively ignores that larger aircraft already frequently carry much more agile, cheap and decisive counters to smaller drones, they are called missiles.
Another way of stating the above truth is that many of the “drone” interceptors Ukraine has fielded to great success could just be as easily be conceptualized as small, affordable electric prop powered guided missiles as they can be conceptualized as drones. Similarly one could conceptualize a fiber optic FPV drone as an evolution of TOW missiles into a more flexible, affordable complimentary form.
The idea that missiles are inherently more expensive than larger drones they are meant to neutralize is also a major thinking error caused by misunderstanding the ways in which the US is dysfunctional and also the basic doctrine the US Military follows. A smaller more limited missile will always be cheaper to produce than a larger more complex flying bomb, the fact that the world has temporarily become delusional about this is going to blow back in the faces of people very violently who confidently believe incorrect things about war because they understand drones and computers…
The only real meaningful distinction that can be made between most missiles and most drones is that most smaller missiles are employed to hit moving targets whereas most long range flying bombs like shaheds are optimized for dispersed static targets. That isn’t a hard distinction of course though (tiny fpv drones are a major exception here) so I just usually resort to calling them all flying bombs. A tomahawk is VERY different than a shahed, but they both fall under the category of “Flying Bomb” to me.
Exactly; and then distinction between an air based missile and air bomb disappeared long ago. Cutting edges always defy classification.