How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[The_Capt]

2 minutes ago, chris talpas said:

Hi The_Capt,

I appreciate you recapping the dangers of Trump winning.  The intent of my question was more around what if any policy differences around Ukraine could one expect with a Harris win?  Outside of her supporting the Biden position, are there any hints of distinction either from statements while a senator or since assuming the candidacy, that would imply a more hawkish or dovish stance or stay the course?
 

@billbindc?  My sense is pretty much status quo on the Biden administration approach.  If she wins, we might smell blood in the water for Russia in '25 - they are running out of runway both economically and militarily.  That might see a policy shift towards more forward leaning.

The Democrats have played this whole war pretty well - deliberate and cautious (sometimes too cautious) but steady.  This one take nuance and balance and I think they navigated it very well both at home and abroad.  The fact that there still is a Ukraine is evidence of this.

[Grigb]

I was passing by some RU Nats news and saw interesting article - The problems of [RU] infantry training and the aspects of training assault troops (notes from lecture given in one RU club). The author is RU Nat infantry instructor from Donetsk direction I mentioned few times. The article is very interesting because the opinion is fresh.

I do not have time now to translate full article (I think google translate should do the job). Here is quick translation of few interesting parts

Quote

[How UKR Kharkiv offensive was stopped]

In the autumn of 2022, the front collapsed, the problem was [fixed] by literally flooding it with meat. Several tens of thousands of military personnel were sent directly from the wheels [no time for training or preparation]…

[RU training period]

In the 14 days [of training] that we have now, we get a semi-finished semi-products, not infantrymen. And then infantrymen are thrown most often just right to the front. Although, depending on the command, sometimes they get trained for two or three more weeks in terms of group coordination, and not immediately to the first line [of defense]. But there are only few such examples, they are not systemic in nature. Unfortunately, the systemic nature is other way round. Apart from the fact that the period is outrageously tight, there is not even a hint of group coordination. Simply because the replacement is not a unit. It's just a group of people who have been pushed [randomly] into platoons.

[How the RU offense works in general]

It seems that the infantry, whether line or assault, functions simply as meat in order to provoke the enemy to exhaust the supply of ammo. This concept of "making a thousand cuts" implies that active assault operations are underway in all areas where our units retain some kind of combat capability. And infantry is used as a meat hammer to create regular pressure on the enemy. I am sorry for my cynicism, but to some extent the concept works, because the enemy does sometimes miss [our] blow, some enemy fire posts do get spotted. This is not one-way game. And when the enemy line of defense becomes very thin or the supply of ammo decreases, [for example the recon] "bird" did not fly in time – we have a enormous breakthrough for the next 200 meters. But these are controversial achievements for the army of a state that claims to regain world superpower status. And this approach seems to be frankly flawed and does not correspond to the human resources expended. To put it quite cynically, a lot of money has to be spent on the dead and wounded [naive RU Nat]. Frankly speaking, I don't understand how it can pay off like this, especially since vehicles are lost as well. But [seems] this strategy has been adopted.

[Why more and more RU soldiers get Putin kiss - kill themselves]

There is no systematic practice of rotating units from the front line. In some places it depends on the specific conditions of the front, that is, people simply cannot be withdrawn. But the general practice is that the unit will perform tasks until the level of losses becomes critical. When the regiments are reduced to three or four hundred people and continue to perform combat missions, this is a loss rate of more than 50%. And the soldiers are getting shocked because they understand what is happening (something very bad). Replenishment comes and gets into this [situation], and does not have time to learn anything.

Or units are reduced to obscenely low manpower levels. On the same Izyum front – it's still 2022 – unit losses were up to 90%. And this has been going on for the third year...

A remark from the audience, from a military signalman: "On May 12, 2022, we arrive to location near Izum. Five days later, the infantry unit went to "Sherwood Forest" [big forest near Izum where a lot of fighting happed]. Reinforcements came. They got the AK and were also sent into the forest while they thought that they had come to stand at roadblocks. And the group was sent under a twelve hours mortar attack - the next day they were just, I'm sorry, they all became 500th [refuseniks]. Then there was still opportunity [for refuse]. Now they would just fall into a catatonic state and wait to be bombarded with grenades [till death]. There is simply no understanding of how a person needs to be introduced to battle and that he may have psychological fatigue."

A remark from the audience, from the military guy: "I have a friend who has been fighting since 2015. And he fought in Wagners, Syria, Libya, the "Redoubt" [RU MoD PMC] at the beginning of the war… And a year ago, he had the misfortune to sign a contract with the Ministry of Defense. Right now he is in a catatonic state, because he is tired of seeing the imbecility that is happening there. He has seen some imbecility in Libya and Syria, but says that it is simply impossible to fight like this. And he can't leave. And he is now on a short vacation in Rostov, and he drinks, drinks and drinks. By the way, a man with two higher educations serves as an ordinary signalman... and such people who have been fighting since 2015 – I have many such acquaintances, because I myself have been fighting since the age of 15 – they are simply prostrated and do not understand what is happening. A friend from the front calls me – he's a miner – and says: the level of training is zero point zero."

[How RU commanders command]

A fairly high–ranking person [officer] said that, in fact, the first task of the assault-men is to identify firing posts. We got lucky, we made our way through, took a tree line. No luck – well, then, they exposed [enemy] firing points, worked like live bait. A massed reconnaissance by combat.

[Why can't the RU army have high-quality soldiers?]

Accordingly, if the level of infantry training is high enough, people will be intelligent, proactive, tactically literate – they will start asking questions: what are we doing, and why? Okay, we are creating continuous pressure on the enemy's line of defense, that's understandable. But let's do something to support our actions?... [But it looks like officers] poked at a point on the map, [and[ soldiers just go under mortar fire. And this shows us monstrous systemic problem. It turns out that the high command is satisfied with this very poor infantry level [ no questions asked]. And this is a huge problem. Because the price of this war – the further we go – is getting higher and higher. And unjustifiably so. There are a lot of excessive losses.

[Drones]

Everything is very difficult with the rotation of units. Yes, there are objective difficulties. When the drone effect zone has already shifted fifteen kilometers to the rear, it is extremely difficult to carry out rotations. But there is a positive experience of countering drones. Take the same Andrey Filatov. He and comrade Bely in their assault unit have developed counter-drone system and are ready to share their experience. The question, again, is about decisions at a higher level.

[Age and physical shape of current so-called volunteers]

Our average age of volunteers is 35-45. There are grandfathers [with age] over 50, there are not a lot of youngsters. Many have never served at all. [And] If we take assault squads, which are formed from a special contingent [zeks], there are literally only a few people who know how to handle weapons. There are no skill to restore [during training]! Even the level of physical fitness, if we take a special contingent , is normal, maybe in thirty percent [of zeks]. This is from what I have observed myself.

[UKR infantry]

By the way, Kraken and Azov... are very well–trained infantry. They take out our regular infantrymen very easy. These specific units are well trained, in a continuous rotation cycle, and their rotation is well set. In regular units, to about a third of the recruits they try to provide a three-month course. Or rather, they tried. Since this is not one way game, recently their training have been reduced to one and a half months. But our infantry still can look at these six weeks with envy. Two thirds of them [UKR infantry] are also just meat, the men are just taken from the street and then send to the front [exaggeration, he himself admits that everyone is provided with one and half month of training]. But a normally one third that is trained does [all] the assault work. And the rest are successful only due to good fire support. These Mykolas can just sit in the pit, [but] they have "eyes" and they see: "Oh, they are coming!". Well, [then] either the drones fly, or they throw a cassette [round] – and our assault group is no more, the Mykolas are back to sitting in the pits.

[UKR mobilization]

This permanent mobilization that they are undergoing is needed not only because they are suffering losses. Tyes, sure they suffer losses. But they [also] try to ensure rotation. There was a period when their rotation was bad, and [then] mobilization accelerated. They have now formed sixteen brigades. However, they do not have enough weapons for them. But sixteen brigades is not bad. Our poor guys in the SMO zone seems to be seven hundred thousand... well, I don't know [if it true]. They [UKR] have a larger total number, they try to provide rotation, and the rest and training. We have difficulties with that. We have a change of personnel [due to death and wounds], in fact, without saving the core [of the unit].

[RU losses of elite units]

Unfortunately, in general, there are not so many motivated people [are left]. The motivated have already been taken out on both sides. We have lost a lot of our men who formed the backbone not only of our Airborne forces, but also of the GRU special forces in 2022. [In RU it sound like they suffered unbelievably big losses]

[Wagnerites]

The level of training of the top Wagner units was very high, all the others were the same meat. But what advantage Wagnerites had? A more adequate organization of the process. Faster management decisions. High mobility both horizontally and vertically, and in both directions. Did the private distinguish himself? No question, here's a squad to lead. Did you distinguish yourself again? Here's a platoon for you. Screwed up? Go back to the squad. Are you tired being in assaults? Go to the carrying supplies duty or to unit that dig in after assault. So, quick decision-making. At the level that the opponent [UKR] has. At the same time, their general tactics were similar to what the [RU] Ministry of Defense is now trying to implement. The same, continuous pressure along the entire front line. But in Wagner, the effect was provided not only by meat–although by meat too–but also by [better] organization. [Better] management, [better] staff mobility. In MoD, it's just a meat pressure...

Regarding the Wagners, I also want to add. They had a "systemic haphazardness" in their actions, which pulled the enemy apart when it was unclear what and where [is going to happen]. MoD often has following practice: using the same route with an interval of two or three days - at the same time! – they send an assault group and watch what happens. And it is repeated every two or three days. It turns out it does not create tension, but train the opponent. They're sitting there and watching by the clock: oh, they're coming again! We just train them that way, [we do not] create tension.

 

[This episode was definitely written by the guy who served in RU army]

It seems that the top military leadership is focused on a very average level of ordinary soldiers, which would be relevant for the linear tactics of the XVIII century, when a person has a minimum of skills and everything is done on command, a soldier does not need to think.

[Conflict with NATO]

The guys and I discussed this issue [conflict with NATO]. And [all] people have a unanimous opinion – and so do I, since I am witnessing it all – how good it is that we are not at war with NATO! Because in a conventional war, we will fail fighting with conventional weapons against NATO. [We can win] Only the nuclear one. And it's good that this is Ukraine [we fight now with], and not, for example, Poland. Let's say a collision with the same Poland on the territory of at least our beloved Ukraine…

A remark from the audience: "Why Ukraine, maybe Kaliningrad."

A remark from the audience: "Kaliningrad will simply be blocked from the sea."

[Author] Still, if you take a Ukraine, then [we will be] washing with [our] blood even more, even worse than now. And I'm not sure that they [RU political elites] will be able to respond adequately. It may be they just got in to stupor. Or maybe they'll remember that there were [some] smart people [RU Nats] and they said something smart [aka fight all capitalists pigs to the death]. Well, that's the perfect plan.

Important remark - author is very loyal anti-western RU Nat. Not some angry pro-western dissident. 

[chris talpas]

5 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

@billbindc?  My sense is pretty much status quo on the Biden administration approach.  If she wins, we might smell blood in the water for Russia in '25 - they are running out of runway both economically and militarily.  That might see a policy shift towards more forward leaning.

The Democrats have played this whole war pretty well - deliberate and cautious (sometimes too cautious) but steady.  This one take nuance and balance and I think they navigated it very well both at home and abroad.  The fact that there still is an Ukraine is evidence of this.

Appreciate the response The_Capt and that is generally my thoughts as well.  Perhaps @billbindc or others attuned can shed some light or confirm steady as she goes.

[billbindc]

41 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

@billbindc?  My sense is pretty much status quo on the Biden administration approach.  If she wins, we might smell blood in the water for Russia in '25 - they are running out of runway both economically and militarily.  That might see a policy shift towards more forward leaning.

The Democrats have played this whole war pretty well - deliberate and cautious (sometimes too cautious) but steady.  This one take nuance and balance and I think they navigated it very well both at home and abroad.  The fact that there still is an Ukraine is evidence of this.

Blinken, Sherman and others are out if she wins. What I sense is that the US will go in for the kill with four more years of runway when Russia has probably at best two. Nothing too dramatic will occur but aid will be stepped up and Ukraine will get more freedom of action. Also, countermeasures to Russian espionage, sabotage and political influence will be increased. 

[Vanir Ausf B]

Another report on acoustic detection systems.

________

Zvook’s detection ranges, though much shorter than radar, are nothing to sniff at. Drones, for example, can be detected up to 5km away. For cruise missiles, the range is about 7km. To pull this off, Zvook designed curved “acoustic mirrors” half a metre in diameter. These dishes concentrate sound waves on the microphones they cup. Most listening stations have two, for a coverage arc of about 200°. Processing takes place on an adjacent computer.

Zvook’s detections typically take less than 12 seconds to show up in an army computer program called Delta. Maryan Sulym, an air-defence sergeant and Zvook’s boss, says the rate of false positives is now about 1.6%. To provide additional verification, Delta users receive a nine-second clip of the sound in question. In areas where Zvook’s roughly 270 (and counting) stations, all donated to the army, are listening, radar is often switched on only in response to alerts, he says.

Its accuracy should increase, too. To triangulate a sound’s origin more efficiently, Zvook is designing a special array of four microphones to plug in to listening stations. That should allow the direction of a sound’s origin to be located to within about 5°. Sergeant Sulym hopes that this will be good enough for interceptors to be launched without the need for a prior sweep from ground radar.

Advances in data processing are revealing acoustic signals to be surprisingly rich. Frequency spectrograms shared by a Ukrainian colonel, who requested anonymity, show that even similar drones have distinct sound signatures. Thomas Withington, an air-defence specialist at RUSI, a think-tank based in London, says you can even hear the motor strain caused by heavy payloads.

https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/07/24/how-ukraines-new-tech-foils-russian-aerial-attacks

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, billbindc said:

Blinken, Sherman and others are out if she wins. What I sense is that the US will go in for the kill with four more years of runway when Russia has probably at best two. Nothing too dramatic will occur but aid will be stepped up and Ukraine will get more freedom of action. Also, countermeasures to Russian espionage, sabotage and political influence will be increased. 

That resonates.

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, billbindc said:

Blinken, Sherman and others are out if she wins. What I sense is that the US will go in for the kill with four more years of runway when Russia has probably at best two. Nothing too dramatic will occur but aid will be stepped up and Ukraine will get more freedom of action. Also, countermeasures to Russian espionage, sabotage and political influence will be increased. 

The big question is Congress.  We already saw what weak and/or compromised GOP leadership did when just a handful of MAGA hardliners went after Ukraine funding and held it up for about 8 months.  There is no reason, none-what-so-ever, to think this dynamic has changed in the House.  Senate... hard to tell, but if the GOP gets control and Trump is President we should expect what we saw before, is that people are afraid to put country ahead of politics. 

With Biden in the race it looked like the Dems might lose control of both Senate and the House.  It's uncertain how Harris changes this equation, but indications are she is an improvement.

Steve

[FancyCat]

From that same economist article, 

Quote

Compared with radar, Ukraine’s microphone networks are cheaper and emit no signals that Russian forces might detect. And whereas clever engineering can sharply reduce an aircraft’s radar signature (as Russia has shown by redesigning Iran’s Shahed kamikaze drones with stealthier composites), propelling hardware through the air generates sound. Crucially, acoustic detection works best at the low altitudes where most combat drones fly. General Hecker reckons the tech is now viable up to about 3,000 metres, with radar able to monitor higher altitudes without interference from clutter near the ground.

Zvook listening stations, each smaller than a shoebox, are produced for about $500 each. By comparison, a radar able to detect a smallish drone 5km away can cost $500,000. A microphone network can therefore be relatively dense, and accuracy increases along with the number of stations that hear a sound. Kyivstar, a telecoms firm, installs Zvook’s kit on its cell towers, handles maintenance and transmits data all free of charge. In areas without functioning cell towers, such as near the front, the system is often hidden in grass without the bulky acoustic mirrors, which might be spotted. Power is provided thanks to a battery or solar panel. For these more discreet emplacements, data are transmitted by broadband satellites.

 

[zinz]

6 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Haiduk, what kind of artillery was doing those strikes?  Those looked like direct hits on vehicles.  SMART?

https://newsie.social/@Tendar/112864027966284115

I found this video. With fpv drones. The strike doesn't show the first strike though. (see smoke from the two vehicles while the fpv drone comes in that is not visible in the first explosion) 

[The_Capt]

17 minutes ago, zinz said:

https://newsie.social/@Tendar/112864027966284115

I found this video. With fpv drones. The strike doesn't show the first strike though. (see smoke from the two vehicles while the fpv drone comes in that is not visible in the first explosion) 

Damn…well FPVs did not need 20 hits that time.

[The_Capt]

55 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

From that same economist article, 

 

So how do they filter out background noise?  Drones are not loud at all compared to all the other clutter.  And is there a reason they could not use this tech to detect vehicles and people?

[billbindc]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

The big question is Congress.  We already saw what weak and/or compromised GOP leadership did when just a handful of MAGA hardliners went after Ukraine funding and held it up for about 8 months.  There is no reason, none-what-so-ever, to think this dynamic has changed in the House.  Senate... hard to tell, but if the GOP gets control and Trump is President we should expect what we saw before, is that people are afraid to put country ahead of politics. 

With Biden in the race it looked like the Dems might lose control of both Senate and the House.  It's uncertain how Harris changes this equation, but indications are she is an improvement.

Steve

Concur. 

If Trump wins a trifecta, Ukraine policy won't reflect Congressional preferences or whatever Pompeo thinks he's selling. It will be a question of whim, revenge on perceived enemies and personal affinity.

[dan/california]

12 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

So how do they filter out background noise?  Drones are not loud at all compared to all the other clutter.  And is there a reason they could not use this tech to detect vehicles and people?

Yes but the noise the drones are putting out is at a very specific frequency, and moving in a very steady way that would give a particular doppler shift. The cheap compute now available can apparently pick it out. 

I suspect there will a whole new generation of acoustic sensors as soon as some real engineering gets done, as opposed to an admittedly brilliant emergency hack job. The fact that acoustic sensors are totally passive makes the advantages to large not to pursue. The Western military contractors will get motivated because they don't want to hand a whole new line of business to the Ukrainians, if nothing else.

[kimbosbread]

I’m not sold on acoustic sensors for drone detection as anything but a band-aid. Electric motors are extremely quiet, and even ICEs don’t have to be that loud. Detecting drones at altitudes up to 3000 meters, I dunno, I’m kinda doubting this especially filtering out the background noise.

The prime example is detecting Orlan-10s. Can it do that?

[Vet 0369]

15 hours ago, Baneman said:

 

I know it's off-topic but I cannot let this pass. 

Clearly neither of you have been to Germany, Austria, Belgium or other European countries where taste and flavour is a real thing. Personally I would back Kaiser Doppelmalz ( Austrian) against any beer in the world, but each to their own tastebuds - there may be contenders in the countries mentioned that I don't know.

I am in the U.S., and used to think that Coors Banquet, Anchor Steam, and San Miguel were the ultimate. Now, for the last few years, I’ve dedicated myself to a Belgian Session Ale (a triple) called Golden Monkey by Victory Brewing Company here in the U.S. honestly, nothing beats a good craft brew no matter where it’s brewed!

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, kimbosbread said:

I’m not sold on acoustic sensors for drone detection as anything but a band-aid. Electric motors are extremely quiet, and even ICEs don’t have to be that loud. Detecting drones at altitudes up to 3000 meters, I dunno, I’m kinda doubting this especially filtering out the background noise.

The prime example is detecting Orlan-10s. Can it do that?

I suspect they won't answer that question..... Heck maybe the whole acoustic thing is a cover for something else entirely. But I doubt that. And the shaheeds and cruise missiles fly far lower than three thousand meters. Indeed the usually fly about two hundred meters if that. The fascinating question is what would putting mufflers on them do?

[chrisl]

37 minutes ago, dan/california said:

I suspect they won't answer that question..... Heck maybe the whole acoustic thing is a cover for something else entirely. But I doubt that. And the shaheeds and cruise missiles fly far lower than three thousand meters. Indeed the usually fly about two hundred meters if that. The fascinating question is what would putting mufflers on them do?

Shaheds are lawnmowers with wings.  You can hear lawnmowers from a few km off pretty easy with only a little elevation - if you go for a hike up in the mountains here you don't have to be very high before you hear every lawnmower and leaf blower for miles.  Cruise missiles are generally turbine engines, and even the quiet ones aren't going to be that quiet.  A small quadcopter that can lift a few kg is practically inaudible over the wind at ~100 ft in an area where the only background noise for miles is the breeze.  If they're within 100 ft they are pretty distinctive - they sound a lot like hummingbirds.

Edited July 29 by chrisl

[Vanir Ausf B]

14 minutes ago, chrisl said:

A small quadcopter that can lift a few kg is practically inaudible over the wind at ~100 ft in an area where the only background noise for miles is the breeze.  .

The Russian system is quoted as having a detection range of 330 meters, an oddly specific number that is probably versus Mavic quadcopters while the "up to 5 km" number given for the Ukrainian system is presumably versus Shaheds.

The advantages of these systems is obviously not their range, it's that they're passive and therefore can be "always on". Plus the units are so cheap you can spread them everywhere.

[billbindc]

The Yamato before the Japanese realized the need for anti-aircraft defenses: 

The Yamato after the Japanese realized the need for anti-aircraft defenses: 

 

A useful way to illustrate the response when heavily invested legacy systems attempt to adjust to disruptive realities and the likeliest outcome thereof. 

 

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

OK, as much as I love hand crafted beer (preferably types that age for a year or more) this is not the right place for it.

Steve

[chrisl]

34 minutes ago, billbindc said:

The Yamato before the Japanese realized the need for anti-aircraft defenses: 

The Yamato after the Japanese realized the need for anti-aircraft defenses: 

 

A useful way to illustrate the response when heavily invested legacy systems attempt to adjust to disruptive realities and the likeliest outcome thereof. 

 

 

 

At first I thought you were posting her as an example of 330 m.

But she's only about 260 m.  

The Gerald Ford is about 333 m.

[FancyCat]

Quote

Other countries are also taking note. Several weeks ago Sky Fortress’s kit was quietly demonstrated on a test range in Europe. Representatives from 11 NATO countries saw (unarmed) cruise missiles and drones handily detected and tracked. Mr Ellison of MDAA, the organiser, says two more such events are planned. NATO is considering deploying microphones for its air defences, says General Hecker.

Several defence ministries in the military alliance’s east are already purchasing acoustic gear for air defence. A Polish aerial-tracking firm supplying them, Advanced Protection Systems, had discontinued R&D on acoustics some years ago. Events in Ukraine persuaded it to try again, says Maciej Klemm, its boss. The firm now also sells acoustics hardware to an undisclosed entity in Ukraine.

In a new twist, some enterprising Ukrainian technologists are rigging dog-fighting drones with microphones to help them zero in on their Russian opposite numbers in aerial combat. The sound ideas continue.

In response to interest of western adoption, from the economist article.

[chuckdyke]

Which ports are suitable for berthing vessels like the Gerald Ford? Its dimensions are a little less than a modern bulk carrier. 

[Grigb]

3 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

The Russian system is quoted as having a detection range of 330 meters, an oddly specific number that is probably versus Mavic quadcopters while the "up to 5 km" number given for the Ukrainian system is presumably versus Shaheds.

The advantages of these systems is obviously not their range, it's that they're passive and therefore can be "always on". Plus the units are so cheap you can spread them everywhere.

Regarding battlefield application of acoustic sensor - in theory they should be good for early warning when supporting Emission detectors. Simple Emission detectors prone to missing customized drones, AI Emission detectors prone to mistakes, only competent EW specialist seems to be the most reliable option but you cannot turn every infantrymen or tanker into EW specialist (it is not that difficult but grunts hate things that have more than one button). Adding acoustic sensor is supposed to make life of grunt easier.

In practice however, RU ad hoc test, based on relativly good active headsets, demonstrate modest detection range (200 meters, 300 at most) at ideal  conditions (no noise, direct view) against common battlefield drones (Mavics, FPV). So, there is some potential, but it will require sufficiently more capable microphones which may not be feasible for common detector.

[hcrof]

4 hours ago, chrisl said:

Shaheds are lawnmowers with wings.  You can hear lawnmowers from a few km off pretty easy with only a little elevation - if you go for a hike up in the mountains here you don't have to be very high before you hear every lawnmower and leaf blower for miles.  Cruise missiles are generally turbine engines, and even the quiet ones aren't going to be that quiet.  A small quadcopter that can lift a few kg is practically inaudible over the wind at ~100 ft in an area where the only background noise for miles is the breeze.  If they're within 100 ft they are pretty distinctive - they sound a lot like hummingbirds.

While I don't know what the detection ranges would be against small drones, it is important not to use human hearing as a baseline. Human hearing is not great, and we certainly can't filter sounds like a computer can! 

Having said that, the higher pitched sound of a small drone will certainly travel less far and is more easily blocked by vegetation etc.