Jammers are far from useless. The enemy will be attacking all of your assets anyway. So there is no incremental cost in operating jamming systems. If jamming systems is all you have, then you are not going to win anyway. The idea that some US-style enemy is going to be picking off Russian assets without effort is BS.
The above video shows a large jamming system. Small portable ones are not useless either and are more than likely being developed. Having a thousand points of light jamming makes it hard for the enemy to take them all out.
Jamm the GPS and all NATO moving harware becomes useless.
They will just start hitting their own troops.
As long as Russia has GPS jammers all over the battlefield they will win.
Even their laser guided bombs need GPS because the ground soldier use it to tell enemy positions. If he can't locate the GPS coordinate of the enemy then the fighter/bomber or the drone will need to come closer to spot the enemy and its 1 million $ bomb can't be used in the guided mode, only free fall but with its "wings" it won't fall like a free fall bomb.
The Vega concern of the Ruselectronics holding (part of Rostec) presented the latest developments to ensure the safety of facilities during the Russian Industrialist International Forum in St. Petersburg. The anti-drone system effectively protects against unauthorized flights, and smart power optimizers - against voltage surges.
The UAV countermeasure system "Aegida", developed by the Research Institute "Vector" (part of the Concern "Vega" holding "Ruselectronics"), determines the location of the drone, breaks the control channel and controls the trajectory of its movement after suppression. The product uses third-party radio signal sources to illuminate targets and is a passive system that does not emit unmasking signals. "Aegis" provides suppression of small UAVs in the sector of angles of ± 45º and at a distance of up to 20 km, providing continuous coverage in frequencies in the range from 400 to 6200 MG, which are currently used to control copters, as well as all frequencies of global navigation satellite systems. By the end of the first quarter of 2021, it is planned to complete tests of the modernized complex and begin delivering it to the market.
Also, the Research Institute "Vector" presented digital energy optimizers at the forum. They record and automatically equalize voltage drops, rises or sharp fluctuations, which saves energy consumption, significantly increases the reliability of power supply systems for facilities and the service life of equipment. The device is designed to normalize the power supply supplied to the consumer in general-purpose networks with a rated voltage of 380/220 V and a frequency of 50 Hz.
The device uses an intelligent control and monitoring system, providing the user with remote access to detailed information about the current parameters of electricity consumption. The equipment also provides information archiving and emergency logging.
“In the modern world, new challenges are emerging very rapidly in terms of protecting industrial and social facilities from various types of threats. And if the topic of protection against unauthorized drone flights is far from new, then the coronavirus pandemic has very sharply raised the issue of protecting medical institutions from voltage surges. Due to the increase in electrical equipment in hospitals, the load on the electrical grid has increased significantly. Therefore, today we see a great demand for devices to ensure the uninterrupted operation of power supply systems, ”noted Andrei Sorokin, director of commercial activities at the Vector Research Institute.
Mindstorm was right, the quackademics that are employed at Western military academies are suffering from an acute form of solipsism, and are in full-blown apoplectic mental degeneracy lol! Also this idiocy seems to be ubiquitous:
And no better example in recent memory is this crackpot Zachary Kallenborn, who writes articles for the Modern War Institute (they probably derive their studies from the COD: Modern Warfare ) which is based in none other than Westpoint of all places lol! Case-in-point the all caps locked title for this laughable article.
SWARMS OF MASS DESTRUCTION: THE CASE FOR DECLARING ARMED AND FULLY AUTONOMOUS DRONE SWARMS AS WMD
My first thoughts were: The Pentagram is really trying to lower the threshold of what can be considered 'WMDs' to probably justify using their nukes, but then again can you lower the threshold lower than completely fabricating the existence of WMD's (hello Iraq/Syria)? But further inspection made me realize how much of a idiot/jackass this guy is:
Zachary Kallenborn wrote:Design similar drones for war, give them bombs or guns, and you have an affordable weapon of mass destruction.
Did you guys see the video he quotes? He sites these dinky civilian drones that can be programmed by amateurs to fly in formations as WMD-level threats lmao?!?! This clown must be afraid of his own shadow, he probably hates showers because he fears he will fall in to the drain lol!
These rinky dinky drones can easily be defeated by: a) Dirt cheap HE-Frag shells because they fly in such close proximity. b) Even cheaper and easier with handheld anti-UAV guns, by firing on them with the same movement pattern as using a chalk-eraser on a school chalk board, in which the drones flying above other ones will start crashing in to the ones below them in a cascading/rippling effect that resembles a cross between dominos, an alpine avalanche and pinball machine.
What really amuses me is how they overhype these rinky dinky drones as WMD level, but downplay and underestimate USSR/Federation AshM's. USSR/Federations AshM's are vastly more formidable than these hovering skeet targets:
1.) Russian AshM's fly several orders of magnitude higher/faster than these UAV-skeet that Western Quackademics deeply hold irrational fear of.
2.) To a similar degree they have warheads much more formidable than these small disposable UAV's....and yes even capable of actually carrying REAL WMD's, such as nukes lmao!
3.) To a similar degree their ECM resistance is vastly superior to these UAV's non-existent resistance.
4.) There's a similar degree of difference between Russian AshM's and their ability to deploy ECM of their own, such as emitting a false radar signature, by reflecting it's 'image' off the surface of the ocean dozens (perhaps ever hundreds) of meters in front of itself. In the case of Kh-90, it had it's own towed decoys, and a plasma cloud generator.
5.) A similar magnitude of difference between the Federation AshM's ability to conduct 'swarm' attacks, and evade being intercepted. The AshM's are capable of flying in a 'wolf-pack' formation which allows one AshM to fly at high altitude and actively emit radar to pick and choose targets for the other AshM's which passively listen and fly in formations that are widely spaced and so not close proximity so they don't have to emit electro-magnetic radiation. The active emitting AshM chooses targets for the other missiles, so they're not wasted on already destroyed targets.
6.)The difference is just as substantial when you consider many Russian AshM's are armored with titanium plating, while these UAV-skeet drones are made up of very cheap plastic with pathetic levels of durability/protection.
7.) There's just as massive of a gap when you consider Russian AshM's capability to maneuver to avoid being shot down, and their ability to fly in any weather condition. Meanwhile these UAV-Skeet drones couldn't even dream of evading being shot down, and likely would crash to the ground with any gust of wind lol! Here's the 3M-54 Kalibr AshM (Chinese designation YJ-18) engaging in evasive maneuvers:
When all things considered USSR/Federation AshM's are easily 10 orders of magnitude more formidable than the swarming drones that Westerners feverishly masturbate over, and when Zircon enters wide active service it should push that to 15-20 orders of magnitude. Lastly we should call this guy Zachary Stilleborne, because it sounds like the OBGYN who was delivering him during childbirth must of dropped him on his head, leaving him braindead and mush for brains!
In Russia, the development of a new complex to combat shock drones began
In Russia, the development of the latest long-range radar surveillance complex based on a helicopter-type drone has begun. Reported by RIA News with reference to a source in the military-industrial complex.
According to the publication, the enterprises of the Russian defense industry have already begun to develop a new drone designed to aim anti-aircraft systems at enemy attack drones.
Since November, the development of an unmanned helicopter for a long-range radar patrol has been underway, which will track small and low-speed enemy drones at low and extremely low altitudes and ensure the guidance of anti-aircraft missile systems of military air defense at them
- quotes the news agency as saying the interlocutor.
The work on the new project was initiated based on an analysis of the experience of recent local military conflicts, including the war in Nagorno-Karabakh. The work was not started from scratch, the development uses the existing groundwork. The source said the new complex will be created "as soon as possible." Other details of the new development have not yet been given.
Note that the experience of recent military conflicts has shown the increased role of unmanned aviation in all its forms, from reconnaissance to striking.
The topic of neutralization of attack drones is becoming a priority in all armies of the world. And although there is no answer to the question of how to destroy them with certainty, it may lie on the surface.
As it turned out, it is easier to shoot down the most modern combat aircraft and even a cruise or tactical missile than to neutralize a small unmanned aerial vehicle. It's about size and, oddly enough, low speed. Air defense radars very often simply do not see small, but extremely dangerous UAVs. And if they do fix it, then what do they shoot with? A rocket that can cost millions of rubles, according to the hardware price of "five kopecks"?
The problem of timely detection of drones is somehow solved - the same drones are created, carrying radars configured to detect the smallest and slowest objects in the air. But how to destroy the detected "drones"? While it is considered that the most effective - to neutralize the communication of the drone with the operator controlling it. That is, to jam the radio signal. But there are attack drones that fly according to a given program and are not connected to external signals in any way. In this case, the drone can only be physically destroyed. Creating a drone-fighter is problematic, because machine-gun and cannon weapons can not be put on it because of the large weight and powerful recoil. And rocket, it is worth repeating, expensive.
How to turn even a medium-weight UAV into an effective interceptor is quite convincingly suggested by engineer Alexander Kuznetsov. In his opinion, it is possible to hunt enemy drones with an ordinary smoothbore gun. Their main drawback is known - buckshot quickly loses its killing power and dissipates. The main reason is gunpowder gases, which, escaping from the barrel, overtaking the swarm of buckshot, create a zone of low air pressure around it, which draws in relatively light projectiles, destroying their dense core.
So, Kuznetsov found a way to lock the gases in a special ejector mounted on the section of the barrel, long enough for the shock charge to fly away to a "safe" distance. His experiments showed that buckshot flies in a dense core at a range of 200 meters, preserving energy and killing force.
An additional effect was a reduction in returns. If such a gun with an ejector and belt feed of ammunition is installed on a drone equipped with radar and optoelectronic systems, it will become an ideal interceptor fighter for attack drones. From deadly stinging and invulnerable drones, drones turn into sedentary ducks-easy prey for skilled hunters.
What does the implementation of Kuznetsov's invention provide? Perhaps a real revolution in the whole shooting business. For the land forces, for example, it can be rapid-fire small-caliber smoothbore guns that will mow everything within a radius of several hundred meters with a stream of buckshot. Yes, and the infantryman will be armed with a smoothbore automatic rifle with an almost fantastic density of fire by today's standards, when for guaranteed defeat of the enemy, even aiming is not particularly necessary.
The possibility of using a smoothbore carbine as a weapon on drones was confirmed last year.
A 12-gauge boar hunting carbine was mounted on a 23 kg UAV with a television guidance system, which found an aerial target and hit it with the first shot.
Isn't that (the last line in bold) what GarryB has been advocating this entire time? It speaks of special shotgun shells with wads that are designed to maintain the main 'body' of pellets thus affectively increasing the effective range beyond 200 meters. This sounds like something similar to the extra tube casing for Russian flame throwers like RPO-M / PDM-A "Shmel-M".
Another alternative that I would suggest is creating HE-Frag shells for 12 gauge shotguns, with fins . Similar to the ones seen for the AA-12 (at the 4:27 mark).
The difference being that the Russian version should have laser beam riding guidance similar to Kornet/Refleks, also I believe a forward firing shrapnel (shotgun like) pattern should work better than the standard HE-Frag shrapnel pattern, and should theoretically have much greater range than the shells with the special wads. Obviously it makes sense to combine both options to create the best solution.
The issue of volume of material fired makes me think if you mount in on its own UAV drone then you can bring it close to targets and use it then 12 gauge or even 10 gauge would work fine, but for very long range engagements I think a variation of airburst ammo like the new 30mm cannon rounds makes sense and for infantry fired ammo a 30mm grenade and 40mm grenade launched round with a laser to set the round off would make more sense.
An automatic grenade launcher like this:
Is fully self contained... mount it in a light armoured vehicle like a BRDM-2 type wheeled vehicle... perhaps Tigr based, and mount a PKT machine gun next to it, but with night and all weather optical sensors... with a ballistic computer you should be able to group rounds around a point target out to max range of 2.5km for a 40mm grenade launcher (above)... a burst of 3-4 rounds with spherical fragment patterns should do the job most of the time... so a circle with a diameter of 5km contains a lot of air space... tie it in with the local AD network and mount jammers and laser dazzlers and perhaps mount obsolete ATGMs with command detonation and HE frag warheads... I am sure they likely have tons of old Falanga AT-2 type command guided missiles left and probably plenty of AT-3s as well... it would be a question of looking at what stocks they do have... they might even have tens of thousands of old SA-7s they could convert to command guided with a big HE frag warhead for all I know...
The thing is that jammers and airburst HE rounds and shotguns carried right up to the targets are cheap and simple and are not dangerous to everything around you like small arms fire which is potentially lethal and damaging to great distances.
A lot of the damage in WWII to cities was AA gun fire that did not explode on or near the target but fell back to earth and hit things on the ground... civilian rules in most countries ban firing rifles into the air because of the danger the bullets represent when they come down. Ironically firing directly straight up is not that dangerous... but firing up at an angle is definitely dangerous.
Did you guys see the video he quotes? He sites these dinky civilian drones that can be programmed by amateurs to fly in formations as WMD-level threats lmao?!?! This clown must be afraid of his own shadow, he probably hates showers because he fears he will fall in to the drain lol!
He is probably panicking because he is realising that western air defences would struggle against drones and cruise missiles, and the Russians who didn't have any useful drones or defence against drone are starting to get both and the west has not made any progress on just defending itself from low flying subsonic cruise missiles.
All this talk of swarm technology is not even needed to defeat most western military forces, but Russia seems to be working on that sort of thing too.
As I have pointed out on this forum too the west is vastly more vulnerable to a swarm attack and of the countries of the world which has a history of large scale production of cheap reliable useful weapons... and it is not the US... if it is not expensive then they don't want to make it because there is not enough profit involved for them to bother.
Russia has ATGMs and anti armour weapons already widely deployed and operational, they also have air defence systems widely deployed and operational...
People go on about the number of HATO fighter planes and tanks they have, but the Russian forces they are facing will be a real challenge... those fighters provide attack and defence services, which is a problem because it is hard to both attack and defend... happens in different locations and requires different loadouts...
Like the US and other countries Russia is developing anti-drone lasers. It just has not been making a big PR campaign about it. So people assume it can't handle this task.
Looks like the US and Turkish airbases are much more vulnerable to drones than any Russian ones.
Turkey launched an investigation into the incident at the Incirlik airbase
Keep in mind the Incirlink airbase hosts nuclear weapons. If they can't defend against small drones, then they probably can't be defended against cruise missile, but then again NORAD wasn't even capable of preventing 747's from slamming in to the Twin Towers so Uncle Sham's air defense was always pathetic!
Yet again Iranian guard drones monitor US Navy ships with impunity, truly embarrassing because it looks like they were monitored within 5km distance, the drone itself has fixed landing gear to boot (which would make it easier to detect )....
Republished images of US fleet surveillance in the Persian Gulf by Iranian Guard drones....
Exercise in the Central District for anti-drone warfare.
Is interesting that, in this exercise, the three main components constituting the the three main layers of the anti-drone approach of domestic Ground Forces battallions
-First: EW systems of various kind (here represented by "Поле-21" "Житель" and "Свет-КУ)
-Second: Hard kill destruction of the UAV (here represented by "Тор-М1"
-Third: Large scale masking/decoying (here represented by "ТДА-3"
has been executed as separated episodes. In this way has been possible to ascertain against different kind of tactical UAV the impact of each component separately so to plan the best force composition but also ascertain the possibility to counteract UAVs of various kind by part of ground forces devoid of one or more of those anti-drone systems.
GarryB, medo, Sujoy, magnumcromagnon, kvs, x_54_u43, thegopnik and LMFS like this post
The creation of anti-tank systems with the function of destruction of drones has begun
Development of a unique multipurpose anti-tank missile system has begun in Russia. We are talking about the world's first ATGM, which can be used not only against armored vehicles and enemy positions, but also for the destruction of unmanned aerial vehicles.
About this for RIA News Bekkhan Ozdoev, the industrial director of the Rostec weapons complex, said.
The development of a promising ATGM is carried out by KBP - Instrument Design Bureau.
It should be noted that today the armies of certain countries of the world have anti-tank systems that can effectively work on some air targets. But we are talking primarily about targets, the thermal radiation of which is sufficient for an anti-tank complex missile to “find” this target in the air and hit it. For example, we are talking about a helicopter at a relatively low flight speed or when "hovering" above the ground.
Not a single modern ATGM is capable of shooting down a drone with any decent degree of probability, since it is a fairly maneuverable target with low thermal radiation.
The new ATGM from the KBP, as noted, will belong to complexes with a wide functionality, in fact, combining both ATGM and MANPADS.
The name of the promising anti-tank missile system has not yet been announced. At the same time, it was noted that missiles of such a complex, seeker (seeker) will be able to work through two channels. It is not only thermal, but also optical. Additionally, it was noted that a special composition of explosives for missiles of a promising complex is being developed.
Interesting... so they anticipate being able to make a sensor that sees IR and normal visible light that is affordable... that sounds like a QWIP sensor chip... and they are being modest, quite a few Russian missiles were designed for anti armour and also anti aircraft use... the Vikhr missile has a switch that can be flipped before launch to enable a proximity fuse for air targets or anti armour (ie impact) fuse for ground targets.
I was actually thinking that ground based optics could be made rather powerful and useful if a bit expensive in the launcher because they can be reused over and over and are not destroyed during the engagement like missile mounted sensors...
I was actually thinking the Bulat missile with a smaller HE Frag warhead with cheap mild steel fragments instead of expensive metals in HEAT cones could be used... the laser beam riding guidance is very accurate and the range to the target and the missile in flight could be tracked using LIDAR... but most important the missile wont be that expensive.
A modular version with different warhead options, or perhaps a dual purpose warhead maybe....
The missile itself has been seen near 57mm calibre ammo and it looks to be about 70-80mm in calibre just at a rough guess. Having a full calibre shaped charge warhead in the nose and another full calibre shaped charge in the tail should allow it to penetrate most modern vehicles from the sides or rear even with ERA, but being able to switch the warheads to fragmentation and have them detonate differently so they both explode like spherical bombs should make them effective against a range of targets... potential for the front warhead to blow a hole in the side of a soft skinned vehicle like a large aircraft and then have the second rear mounted warhead fly in to the cavity and then explode would also be very good too.
So this seems like it is going to be a replacement for Verba and Kornet it seems... but the problem is that MANPADS are slim and high speed to chase down fast aircraft, while ATGMs are fat to get the calibre and therefore penetration to deal with very heavy armour.
Perhaps this idea will be more like a shorter ranged missile like Bulat that is intended specifically for drones and low and slow targets like helicopters as well, and also only light armour or bunkers... without trying to penetrate heavy tanks from the front...
Isos wrote:Jammer are no different than radar. It send a signal and can be triangulated just like any source of EM waves with the right tool.
Which is why you want to put your jammers on a drone. And your radar antenna eventually.
Depend on what you want to jamm.
If it is smartphone 4g/GSM signal then a drone mounted jammer will be good.
If it is an enemy military radar working at 20kW peak power you will need a powerfull jammer. Drones can't deliver enough power such jammers with their small engines.
Isos wrote:Jammer are no different than radar. It send a signal and can be triangulated just like any source of EM waves with the right tool.
Which is why you want to put your jammers on a drone. And your radar antenna eventually.
Depend on what you want to jamm.
If it is smartphone 4g/GSM signal then a drone mounted jammer will be good.
If it is an enemy military radar working at 20kW peak power you will need a powerfull jammer. Drones can't deliver enough power such jammers with their small engines.
Or they could have a suicide drone with a large EMP warhead.
20Kw is only 26 HP, so say you wanna saturate the spectrum locally you need what? about 50Kw? It won't be a portable drone, but a mid sized one can do the trick
mnztr wrote:20Kw is only 26 HP, so say you wanna saturate the spectrum locally you need what? about 50Kw? It won't be a portable drone, but a mid sized one can do the trick
: D
The tin shield has an average power of 3kw, and that has a truckload of stuff.
50kw on a drone require 300 KW of electrical generation capacity, 250 kw of cooling ,and due to size it will be omnidirectional, so a bigger, 2m diameter radar will laught into the face of it.
Oh, and the cost of it is very high : )
And against a big radar it will be useless, all that it achieve is to forbid the distance calculation for a single radar.
And just as a refernece, the F-35 radar has less peak power than your drone jammer average power : ) But that bird has lot of fuel for evaporative cooling : )
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
kvs
) which is based in none other than Westpoint of all places lol! 
).... 
