I’m concerned that this is getting much too far from the topic this was posted in, as this doesn’t really have anything to do with the discussion about consequences to the US for bombing Iran. But I still think it’s worth an answer, and maybe a larger discussion, so I thought it best to spin off a new thread.
Here is a web page talking about what size of a drone can carry a certain amount of weight.
But basically, to carry something of any significant weight (which would include a bomb that can cause a large amount of destruction) you are talking about something the size of a small plane. After all, even single-person aircraft aren’t tiny, and a good-sized bomb can easily weigh more than an adult human. As an example, the US employs “Predator” drones to take out targets that are 30’ long with a 50’ wingspan. There is a reason these are often referred to as “unmanned aircraft” rather than the misleading term “drones”.
These craft are typically launched from a 5,000 foot runway, and the US has successfully launched drones from aircraft carriers (using a catapult launcher). So really, the kind of boat you would launch an attack drone from would be the same that you’d launch any other aircraft from; an aircraft carrier.
(Note: I am not an expert on military matters or aircraft, but I have gathered this answer from some quick online research. If someone has better info or real expertise, please feel free to offer corrections or provide more info and detail.)
It didn’t seem appropriate for IMHO, and wasn’t politically motivated. Maybe FQ, but FQ is pretty restricted, so I just figured MPSIMS would allow for an open discussion. If I screwed up I apologize.
I am sure it must come down to some trade off of range vs weight and lift. Someone might be able to provide a formula. But if the bomb is really small, then the drone can be correspondingly, all the way down to Ukraine quadcopter dropipng grenades (technically, small bombs.) All depends on how far you want to go and how much boom you want.
Predator drones are basically unmanned planes that carry weaponry like bombs or missiles. Iran does have some of those, although they’re nowhere near as impressive or deadly as a Predator:
But the drones Iran launches from ships wouldn’t be Mohajers, they’d be something like the Shahed. The line between a missile and a drone gets blurry, but they’re basically very slow missiles that can turn around and fly in circles if they want to - hence the term “loitering munitions”.
Shahed drones don’t need a runway at all, they can take off from a rack mounted on the back of a truck. Presumably a ship would do just as well.
Not quite what you are asking but relevant; drone boats are a thing, and the Iranians have been accused of using them in the Straits to attack ships. No numbers on the weight of the bombs, but it’s a lot easier to carry weight with a boat than a plane so I’d assume you could get a pretty big bomb on one.
Note that Shahed drones are big enough that they probably would need a runway. However, despite being powered by either a propeller or a jet engine, they’re initially launched off a standing rack using a small booster rocket.
It’s actually a very Kerbal Space Program coded design. Someone needs to check whether Jebediah Kerman had ties to the IRGC.
Psychologically, I’m sure grenades dropped among the Los Angeles populace would lead to almost as much media coverage and panic in America as bombs that are 5x or 10x the size of those grenades. The purpose of such an Iranian attack would be to be like some kind of reverse Doolittle Raid; not all that damaging, but a massive psychological shock.
Ukraine did this, very effectively. And not a terror attack on civilians, but on Russian military officers.
They had intelligence about a shack where Russian officers were, sent a drone carrying a hand grenade, identified the officers’ shack as the one with the heating stove, and dropped the grenade down the stove[pipe chimney, eliminating those officers.
Good example of proper, legitimate military actions against opponent military, and combining military operations with intelligence.
Ukraine also launched a devastating attack on the Russian strategic bomber fleet, using truck-launched drones. The trick there is that airplanes are inherently fragile, and a small munition can effectively completely destroy one, with a direct hit. Which it’s easy to get, using a smart drone against a plane sitting on the tarmac.
Yeah, i think there will be a lot of real warfare done with small drones going forward. Things that are easy to hide, easy to launch, and hard to see on radar (or by eye, from any distance).
The FBI warning to California officials (to get back to my original post and question) was first reported by ABC News, who apparently omitted that the warning was based on unverified intelligence. ABC’s story got picked up by some other sites (not NPR, as far as I can tell), without checking the original source, apparently. Now the White House says there is not now and never has been any such danger.
On the other hand, an Iranian official has claimed that they have boats or ships that could get close enough to the US to support some sort of attack.
On the third hand, US officials are now stating that attacks from Iran are more likely to be cyber attacks, or physical attacks from sleeper cells.
California does have the largest Iranian diaspora population, most prominently Tehrangeles. Mostly they descend from or are Iranians that fled the Islamic Revolution and thus have little love for the current Iranian government, but of course that matters little to our current government’s willingness to throw them under the bus.
Fear not: the M is for Miscellaneous. Has been for a couple years at least now. I think in part for that specific reason. We had a whole thread about it in ATMB if memory serves.
On the fourth hand some people are concerned, not that Iran will attack California but that the US will attack California and blame it Iran. But, at least as far as I know, that’s little more than internet speculation.
