I agree with people saying this might be mostly for satellite images, but even a drone pilot, staring at a shaky and noisy camera image due to the distance, EW and other interference, might have a hard time telling a decoy from a real one, well, unless there's a helicopter on it of course.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You and I have the luxury of not being in combat and not seeing the target for a second or two.

In real time it might trick a pilot and as dumb as it sounds if you manage to trick a pilot and have them target paint then it’s worked.

I like to think the prevalence e of these decoys indicates the failings of the Russian military but in fairness everyone does it.

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it's more to deceive intelligence operators going over satellite images; I don't think Ukraine are flying manned sorties with jets over Russian airspace.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

Same concept though.

If you fool someone 1 time it’s worked, instead of target acquisition at speed replace it with target acquisition under duress and while overloaded.

[–] Hubi@feddit.de 5 points 1 year ago

Pretty sure they are not doing this to fool enemy pilots, they are trying to trick analysts looking at satellite imagery.

[–] thepreciousboar@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I guess it's still time spent from the operator to analyze and decide. This instead will make it a 0 time decision (and also a good chuckle)

[–] EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago

Drones and bombers are usually far enough away that the shadow wouldn't render in the first place. So unless you have FPV drone in that chunk it would look normal