Russian defence against drone swarms

The upgraded anti-drone complex "Serp-VS5D" has successfully completed testing. It is a multi-function system that combines the ability to detect and counter by electronic means small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The Serp can operate both against a single target and/or against a swarm of drones in a 360-degree sector. The Serp can also operate in sectors of 90 degrees with independent operating modes. This makes it possible to use drones in sectors that are not covered by the anti-drone complex.

The irony is that after years of claiming how backwards the Russian military are with using and defending against drones (their impressive air defence notwithstanding), that now Russia is probably right up there with the best armies in using drones to support operations in all sorts of areas, but more importantly no western military has gone up against an enemy that effectively used drones against them either so the western drone defences are likely rather patchy too.

It says this drone has a 30mm shotgun, shotguns are normally described in gauges... the most familiar and common type is the 12 gauge.

The gauge is determined by the number of perfectly spherical balls that can be made of 1 pound of lead, so if you take one pound of lead and make 12 equal sized round balls with it they will be 12 gauge. Obviously the smaller the number the bigger the calibre. 12 gauge equates to about 18mm and an 8 gauge shotgun is about 23mm calibre so a 30mm calibre shot gun is probably a 7 or 6 gauge shotgun calibre.

An exception is the .410 gauge shotgun which is 0.410 inches in calibre and can also fire .41 calibre pistol rounds.

The number of guns and ammo types made is not continuous... I have heard of and seen 32 and 30 and 20 and 16 and 12 and 10 gauge rounds and ammo being commercially produced... and also 410 gauge shot guns of course... the larger number gauges all carry shot or solid slugs but have less recoil and fewer projectiles compared with the rounds with the smaller gauge number.

A 30mm shotgun round that is perhaps 3 or 4 inches long would be rather powerful so it might use shorter propellant stacks and only be 2 or 3 inches long to carry more projectiles but to not have too much recoil when fired.

A version of a Saiga that fires these rounds would be interesting but a 30mm round would limit the number of ready to use rounds.

In comparison a 12 gauge Saiga with a 25 round drum mag would not be a huge load for a drone and the weight might make the payload manageable as well as the recoil, but it would probably only be effective to 20-30m.

Would be interesting to test.

Drones that drop grenades on troops might be flying out of reach but a shotgun blast of a light pellet load might set off the grenade at an altitude where it wont hurt the soldiers below, and could protect them from attack while someone with a sniper rifle or LMG shoots at the drone dropping the grenades.

One of the more interesting upgrades for the SA-13 was a South African upgrade that allowed it to use the SA-13 missiles but also the previous SA-9 missiles. The SA-9 was a BRDM-2 based vehicle with four IR guided SAMs of the SA-9 type, while the larger more expensive but also more capable SA-13 was an MTLB based vehicle with 6 SA-13 missiles ready to fire.

The upgrade was based on the MTLB chassis but you could fit a mix of SA-9 and SA-13 missile... the former being older and cheaper but good enough for quite a range of targets, while the more capable and more expensive SA-13 missiles could be used for more difficult higher value targets.

Essentially the anti tank missile carrier based on the BRDM-2 was designed to carry a mix of AT-4 and AT-5 missiles, with the smaller lighter missiles allowing more missiles to be carried in total. The larger missiles had better range and penetration for stronger targets, but the lighter missiles could be used on weaker targets so more missiles could be carried.

I like these ideas and think they should be carried on... the SOSNA is a smaller lighter SA-19/SA-22 already, but the anti drone version of the SA-22 might even be smaller than the SOSNA... it would be interesting to compare the specs of the different missiles.

Equally the Bulat ATGM is a half sized Kornet which looks like a rather interesting system that could be used with Metis as a light portable missile for special forces.

The Bulat is laser beam riding so it will be rather faster than Metis and it is probably lighter and with longer range.

A laser beam riding version of Metis would allow Metis and Bulat to be carried and used together.

Bulat in a HE warhead equipped model might actually be a rather good missile for use against drones too... the HE warhead equipped Kornet-EM could be used out to 10km range and altitude... and does not rely on RCS or IR signature of the target.

I thought Tigr, the same way as Gibka-S.

The Gibka is able to launch MANPADS like Verba and Igla-S, but also Shturm and Ataka and presumably Khrisantema... adding Kornet and Bulat and Sosna and this new anti drone Pantsir would make it a potent vehicle.

Hole wrote:I meant a package of 12 missiles + some optics and small radar.

This one has something looking as datalink antenna * or something like that - an oval disc shape in the front of a rack.
And something looking for IFF on the side of a rack.
Just as a reminder, Gibka is a naval system known for years, only in its "S" - samochodnyj - variant.
For ships, this is how the system looks like :

Edit : * silly me, it is a covering hatch of optical tracking system, not datalink antenna I have just realized that.





It was fed with the target location by on board radar, and the optical head was used for final tracking.

Gibka-S works on the same principle, more or less, with target data supplied by a battery command vehicle with 1L220 radar :



It is called MRUK - mashina razviedky i upavlyenya komandira and can control up to 6 BMO - boyevych mashin otdielienya - distanced no closer than 8 km, on the move.
Its radar can deteck&track targets in 40 km range and 10 km altitude, and speed up to 700m/s.

In theory, one system can easily cover almost 20km frontline - 8km is the minimum range of command link, not maximum.
Sooo ... it is already an overkill for the job.
Sure it can do the job, but we are talking about killing a drone that has a 4km range and flies 100m/s if the wind blows his sail

Sure it can do the job, but we are talking about killing a drone that has a 4km range and flies 100m/s if the wind blows his sail

Which is why I suggested adding Kornet and Bulat to the mix... both will be relatively cheap missiles that are supersonic but rather accurate and laser beam riding.

Unified launchers are a good thing... they adapted the missile launcher on the BMP-2 to allow AT-4 and AT-5 missiles to be used interchangeably... both are wire guided so that was not that big a deal.

Also means you can use up old weapons from stock in training and exercises and conflicts but still have the new stuff if the situation demands it.

True, and that is why I expect a revival of anti aircraft artillery of higher calibers.
A 100mm gun battery can effectively cover a 40km wide front, at a margin of cost.
Even with programmable ammunition, it still will be much less expensive than any missile.
And a missile of that range won't be inexpensive, because we are close to the Pancyr range here. 57E6 can be considered as inexpensive only if we compare to other missiles, especially western-made ones. But won't cost less rather than a 100mm programmable round.
Not to mention the price of a whole missile system clashed with a four-gun battery commanded by a single command center with optical tracking.

Just as example: Elbit produces a 100mm M310 round for D-10T guns of T-54/55. It has a programmable fuze with three modes, that is rapid impact, impact with delay, and airburst.

When trying to work out the cost of flak you must consider that against maneuvering targets you will need to fire many shells.

Best tactics against small drones is to hide inside the ground to freeze the front. Destroy its air force to not be able to hit you with penetrating bombs. Then degrade its military production capability and push on the front freely.

A bit what Russians are doing.

Jammers are also useful but not working 100%.

I think it is important to split the jobs and the very lowest base level will be an APS system for most vehicles and perhaps even positions that include sensors that detect threats and react very quickly with a munition to intercept enemy threats.

Jammers and smoke and lasers to blind optics and perhaps in larger vehicles or bases a bit more power to actually bring down drones.

Soldiers could carry a shotgun round for under barrel 40mm grenade launchers that could be fired at either drones or at grenades or munitions they try to drop on them with the hope of setting them off at a safe distance.

The US are working on 18mm grenades that can be fired through a 12 gauge shotgun, but Russia could go with a 8 gauge shotgun calibre which is 23mm calibre which they already have in use (KS-23).

The next thing up could be a light vehicle with sensors and anti drone equipment and weapons... jammers and perhaps 23mm cannon with air burst ammo and of course missiles like Kornet-EM in the 10km range HE version and the Bulat smaller missile also in a HE version. Such vehicles could be designed to be effective against ground targets too so could offer fire support and also operate with convoys... the level of armour could depend on the role.

Then of course you have your actual air defence systems that are 30mm and 57mm with air burst shells that could also be used in fire support roles and of course SOSNA missiles and Igla-S and Verba MANPADS and ATGMs in the anti air role, and also TOR and Pantsir... anti drone missiles, plus laser guided versions of 57mm and 80mm ground launched unguided rockets. Jammers and directed energy weapons to dazzle and to damage.

Then you go up the normal air defence vehicle tree of systems but also a separate tree that would include BMPs like the T-15 and also the Terminator type vehicles.

The 100mm gun and other large calibre weapons for anti drone use does not really make sense... the large calibre means excellent range but the flight time of the shell would make it rather useless because a drone might only be detected a 100m from its target or even less so only an APS type system is going to have time to do anything.

I think the large calibre anti air round is not a bad idea but that using an already in use calibre makes sense in the same way that the American 152mm Shileghlah (spelling) didn't make sense and the 100mm and 115mm and 125mm tank gun fired missiles did make sense.

Your 152mm artillery will be operating behind your lines and can reach an enormous distance into enemy lines by its very nature, which makes it ideal for delivering surprise attacks on drone launch positions or supply lines taking drones into an area, but hitting a flying drone from 40+km away does not make a lot of sense to me even if it could be achieved.

You can't expect to have that sort of comprehensive coverage because drones can weave between buildings and trees and bushes and not be visible for most of their flight, so launching a 152mm shell from 60km away.... where is it going to be when the shell arrives?

On the other hand a MALE or HALE drone would be an ideal target for a scramjet boosted 152mm shell... but such drones are always going to be easy targets for most AD platforms.

The 2S38 with a 57mm autocannon should be fine in armoured forces and 23mm and 30mm cannon with air burst rounds should be effective against drones attacking supply columns or positions in the battlefield.

In terms of protecting the public I think detection is important first and your own drones defending your civilian population might be the answer there.

There wont be a single answer that fixes everything and solves all the problems, they are going to need layers with jammers and EW... even just stations listening for command signals to determine where the drones and operators are and work out which are friendly and which are not... plus APS and shotgun and airburst round options.

I would suggest a 40mm grenade shotgun round for last line of defence stopping a drone going after you and also a more sophisticated airburst 40mm grenade for auto grenade launchers that could be used against air targets like drones but also ground targets behind cover but with no over head protection.

If they can make 23mm cannon and 30mm cannon airburst command detonated rounds then making one for a 40mm grenade should not be a big problem.

Then you have laser jammers to blind the drones so they can't see their targets and laser weapons to break drones, especially drones hovering above observing the attack and orchestrating follow up attacks...

Smoke and cages and nets as well as missiles ranging from ATGMs and small missiles up to larger systems as needed and of course cannon with airburst shells to optimise performance...

The key will be LIDAR and FLIR and EO and radar sensors to detect the threats... airborne in balloons or tethered drones would allow the best and earliest detection making defeating the target much more likely.

But this is all and should be in the anti drone threads instead... I will move this shortly.

marcellogo wrote:
Mini and micro drones are infact very elusive target as they fly very low covered by trees and building so the AD defence need to be very close to the object to protect.

It will be close to impossible to deal with this threat by means other than electronic suppression.
Those things are simply too small, slow and agile.
Just put an algorithm of random course changes, and you won't be able to distinguish a drone from a bird.
Mission impossible.
So no automatics will work here, only the human eye & brain.

But as we can witness now, because of the intensity of drones on the battlefield, a big war with a potent opponent will be much more similar to trench warfare rather than Blitzkrieg.
No society other than zombified Ukrs would handle this level of losses.
That's why a towed/semimobile battery of multipurpose guns would do a good job.
Imagine having a modern equivalent of KS-19 100mm gun battery.
It can be used for all kinds of fire support, at distances up to 20+ km, and height of 15+ km ...
Direct fire, and indirect fire in suppression mode, all can be handled here.
Guns can work autonomously, with no crew at all...
100 mm is big enough to get a programmable fuzes, all sort of ammunition types ... Airburst, remote detonated, laser guided... At a fraction of a cost of mobile AD system like Tor or Pancyr.
Sure, it will be more or less stationary, but we have a trench warfare.

I appreciate Iran choosing the 100mm AA gun calibre because it is a high velocity weapon for shooting down aerial targets, but modern long range artillery in the form of 152mm Coalition is also a high velocity gun too and would probably be better suited to the role.

It is on an armoured mobile platform and a gun mount that can be traversed 360 degrees and elevated to very high shooting angles, and it is going to already be in production.

The Coalition will be connected to the artillery network to receive target data and firing orders so shells from different platforms arrive together... the sort of system that would also be useful to connect to the air defence network to engage aerial targets too.

Not only that but the rounds can be semi guided to manouver a little as it approaches its target... but of course its enormus volume for HE and fragments means it wont need a direct hit to be effective.

It will be close to impossible to deal with this threat by means other than electronic suppression.
Those things are simply too small, slow and agile.

They are small and agile but if they can't see their targets... or anything else then they can't hit anything either... a decent laser system that directs laser beams at the flying threats would nullify their effectiveness and an APS system that could shatter the drone at 40m from the tank or vehicle would render it a nonthreat.

EMP weapons to fry the electronics, lasers to physically remove wings and propellers, shotgun based weapons widely deployed, missiles, and of course defensive drones hunting down and killing enemy drone operators and enemy troops on the front line and also as I said looking for and engaging the all important high flying recon drones used to find targets for the FPV drones and suicide drones will be critical too.

Jammers are important but Russian drones will already fly home when they get jammed and can't find the target... one presumes Kievs drones can or will get the same capacity which means drones that can track enemy drones to where they return to would be useful for dealing with enemy drone operators too.

There is not simple solution and they need a layered solution from soldiers driving trucks through to new convoy protection vehicles to new positional jammers and jammers for vehicles and also for aircraft.

Mini missiles for TOR and Pantsir and also for SOSNA and Shturm/Ataka/Krisantema and Kornet-EM and Bulat armed vehicles.

I would say attack helicopters with suitable missiles (laser homing rockets and ATGMs and air burst 30mm cannon shells) would be useful for chasing down enemy drones as they have speed and armour, but also the weaponry and sensors to track drones at close and medium ranges... but then a BTR-82 with two 23mm cannon and IR and EO sensors and air burst shells would be rather interesting too.

As I said air burst 40mm grenades would be superior to shotguns because even an 8 gauge shotgun wont be effective much beyond 60m or so, but a 40mm grenade has a know trajectory and if you can design the projectile to create a forward directed cone of fragments effective to perhaps 20-30m then you can fire a burst of grenades towards a drone and have the grenades explode short of the target and splash fragments all over them.

The 40mm grenade launcher would be effective to 1-1.5km which no shotgun could ever match... a shotgun grenade for the 40mm under barrel grenade launcher could be issued to troops operating guns or in trenches as a last ditch effort to fire at a very close drone or a falling grenade to give them some chance of surviving.

Most drones that drop bombs or grenades often operate too high to see or shoot but as their grenades or bombs fall you should be able to see them at 20m or more which should allow a shot with a 40mm under barrel grenade shotgun round if it is already loaded.

Would be a fearsome anti enemy personnel round too... not to mention useful for directing into a trench or tunnel before throwing in a grenade.

The 40mm under barrel grenade launcher has no shell case so firing it and having it explode a few metres in front of you to send buckshot type projectiles forward in a cone might be tricky to implement but I think it would be worth it.

An exact caliber is irrelevant, you can use 203 if insist
I speak more about a concept rather than its detailed execution.
My point is that the saturation of the battlefield with such small tools will only increase.
This war started with Bayraktar myth, developing into Mavic drones quadruped price on Aliexpress to end up with mass, tens of thousands scale of garage-made inexpensive single-use drones.
That will get AI soon and will execute its mission all on its own.

That all happened in only 2 years, as always when a serious war is going on.

When I was considering buying a drone as a grown-up boy toy I was simply shocked at how it developed.
Before the war started, for $500 you could have bought a drone that tracked & recognized faces. Recognized and prioritized objects. It could avoid obstacles on its own, and return to the starting point when the signal was lost. It could operate at a preplanned trajectory and path, using waypoints. Or different flight patterns applied. One of the models my friend purchased as a photographer, can loiter around and take photos when recognizes a smiling face - he is using it for photographing weddings, it's his business. It makes closeups, frames, etc - all by itself.
Those things were unimaginable a decade ago.

We see a full-scale doctrinal struggle, but there is one clue we can make already.
It is all about the money.
Russkie doctrine is a win-win for them because it is not important if they will hit anything or not.
By using 20 drones for $2k each, they force the opponent to burn millions for rockets intercepting them.
That is why I expect even further economy of the battlefield, and that is why some old-fashioned tools will be taken out of storage.

Back in the late 40s/early 50s Russians were working on a 152mm AA gun.
So modifying the Koalitsiya and using specialized ammo could be in the cards.

An exact caliber is irrelevant, you can use 203 if insist

The exact calibre is critical.

Using an existing calibre that is already deployed means you can add roles to existing units or add a few production orders for something already in serial production with minor changes and upgrades to the equipment and your air defence gun is ready to go.

Introducing another calibre to the inventory is not a good idea if other calibres can already meet the challenge.

203mm is too big to mass produce in the numbers needed and a 203mm airburst guided shell is going to cost more than many types of drone.

The size and weight of the 152mm round is a bonus for range and blast radius and shrapnel weight and range in terms of how far away it can be set off and still shatter the target drone or drones or missiles or munitions.

They have vehicles in service with high elevation... light auto cannon vehicles already used for AD like the 30mm Tunguska and Pantsir, and new vehicles with 57mm guns, and the artillery vehicles including the 100mm gun on the BMP-3 and BMD-4 and the 2S34 Hosta, but also the 122mm on the 2S1 and of course the 152mm guns on various armoured vehicles.... 2S3, 2S5, 2S19, and 2S35 and 2S43, and they also have the 2S7 in 203 but its ability to turn 360 degrees is limited because like the 2S5 and 2S43, the 2S7 is not turret mounted.

I speak more about a concept rather than its detailed execution.

Even conceptually a 152mm gun that fires shells to 80kms must have a pretty high muzzle velocity which is good for AD guns.

The round doesn't even need to be 152mm calibre... you could make it a 90mm subcalibre round with a sabot to get extra muzzle velocity if that is important or keep it full calibre and fit a ramjet engine to boost speed and range and ability to turn.

To be clear it does not need to loop the loop and pull enormous high g turns... most of the time it will just be a question of turning a few degrees in flight so that when it reaches the interception area and detonates it scatters enough metal where the target should be to shred it and bring it down. Direct hits are not required.

My point is that the saturation of the battlefield with such small tools will only increase.

Further complicated by the fact that you will have your own small tools too which you wont want taken down by your own defences.

This war started with Bayraktar myth, developing into Mavic drones quadruped price on Aliexpress Laughing to end up with mass, tens of thousands scale of garage-made inexpensive single-use drones.
That will get AI soon and will execute its mission all on its own.

The bigger drones flying at altitude are a critical threat that need to be dealt with... the really big ones will be shot down, but the smaller drones that loiter and find targets for attack drones are the main problem because eliminating them makes the smaller drones rather less effective.

That all happened in only 2 years, as always when a serious war is going on.

Because of WWII the Soviets went from I-16s to Mig-15 jets over an incredibly short period of time.

Back in the late 40s/early 50s Russians were working on a 152mm AA gun.
So modifying the Koalitsiya and using specialized ammo could be in the cards.

The point is that even if they weren't, the 152 is going to be naval and army and it will already be deployed widely in their roles of counter battery fire and attacking enemy positions and resources. Especially for the Navy, having guided shells that can shoot down air threats would actually be useful along with shells that can be guided to a point target and launched in large volumes.

Imagine a new Russian destroyer with a 152mm and new Russian cruiser with a 203mm... both twin gun mounts... both fully automatic and unmanned and the 152mm gun firing 80 rounds a minute to 180km and the 203mm gun firing 50 rounds a minute to 250km.

The new UK navy with 6 destroyers with 50 SAMs each and two aircraft carriers...

They could fit the 203mm shells with scramjet motors and have them flying at mach 8 or more... you could put a 10kg HEI bursting charge that detonates them 10m short of impact on a target ship... a 110kg shell blasted into fragments and hitting a ship at mach 4-5 would be devastating, though the damage would be localised... multiple hits would disable a ship pretty quickly.

And being fully automatic you can set up a swarm attack very quickly and easily... simply by firing for 30 seconds...

It makes sense to use 152mm ammo just like it make sense to use 125mm calibre missiles to extend the effective range of tank fire against moving targets.

It also means you can use older 2S3 and 2S19 for the air defence role to deal with cruise missile attacks and even coastal defences to intercept cruise missiles coming ashore or sea drones approaching harbours etc etc.

Moving to anti drone thread now.

As said at the end this can be mounted on various vehicles or located at bases or positions or on top of buildings.

A military version on an armoured vehicle is likely, and they are likely working on improvements all the time.

Isos wrote:Jammers are also useful but not working 100%.

But Russian jammers are working perfectly especially the ones they carry as a backpack. Have you seen them?

The Russians are very clever and practical and I would guess most of their systems work the way they are designed, but the enemy is the entire west and when they see new systems and tactics they will immediately go to work to find fixes and bypasses to defeat these systems.

This means the best solution is always multiple overlapping solutions.

Think of it in terms of tank armour... it is not enough  to just install ERA or APS or even SHTORA EW systems... you need good solid base armour and composite armour on top (including spaced armour) and ERA or NERA on top of that and perhaps a cage and more ERA on top of that and APS and EW systems and active electronic self defence systems based on lasers... and camouflage systems like Nakidka and screening and other methods of hiding the presence of your vehicles... smoke, nets, etc etc.

No one method will protect a tank but all the methods combined will not make your tank invincible either, but it all makes it harder for the enemy to deal with your forces meaning more shots at them and more death to them while they are shooting out your jammers or other equipment before they can start hitting your armour.

Anti drone systems have to be the same and widespread... camouflage and netting when stopped, and cage armour and air burst cannon shells from 23mm and 30mm to 40mm grenades to 57mm guns and bigger, plus DEWs like EMP or lasers, smoke, jamming equipment, etc etc.

Blinding them so they fly back to where they were launched from and shell where they were launched from is a sensible tactic too... shooting down drones is one thing but killing their drone operators is a more efficient way of draining the swamp.

Having a swarm of thousands of AI controlled drones hunting enemy equipment is far more efficient than having thousands of drone operators straining on small screens to find and ID targets... upping the kill rate via automation would also allow shock to take effect on the enemy side as more and more of their assets are taken out.

Part of the problem in combat is dealing with an enormous number of targets at once.

If you have 20 men with rifles and 200 enemy soldiers start crossing a field, that means bare minimum your soldiers have to shoot and kill at least 10 men each before their troops reach your line... odds are they will reach your line and then their numbers will lead to them overwhelming you.

Of course 20 men with machineguns and the 30 survivors of the 200 enemy might just turn and run.

What I am talking about is overwhelming enemy positions with threats... the way the police do... when you have a shooter you get a large number of police to surround them... there are not many things that offer 360 degree protection and concealment so someone is going to get a clear shot at the guy.

John Wick is fiction... think of it in terms of sports... even the most amazing player in hockey or soccer or whatever can't go through every member of the opposition team... each tackle attempt and you lose a little control which the next tackler can take advantage and eventually someone takes the ball off you.

Except in the real world they wont line up and take their turn to shoot you, they will all be shooting at once.

https://iz.ru/1673410/aleksei-mikhailov-iuliia-leonova-roman-kretcul/zenitnaia-rasstanovka-v-armii-sozdaiut-mobilnye-gruppy-dlia-borby-s-bpla


DRONES AIR FORCE (AIR FORCE) DEFENSE
Highlight the essentials off
Russian troops and facilities will be protected from drones with the help of special mobile anti-aircraft gun groups. Currently, they are being formed as part of several Russian combined arms armies, as well as the armies of the Air Force and Air Defense, sources in the Russian Defense Ministry told Izvestia. They will be armed with ZU-23-2 automatic cannons mounted on truck chassis, as well as pickup trucks equipped with large-caliber machine guns. The use of such mobile firearms is a cheap and effective way to protect against drones, experts say.

Time-tested
In addition to firepower, the new units will include electronic warfare equipment and smoke detectors, sources told Izvestia. The latter can cover the object with a thermal smoke screen, impervious to both optoelectronic systems and UAV thermal imagers.

The ZU-23-2 anti-aircraft gun is designed to protect slow-moving and stationary objects from strikes by tactical fighters, attack aircraft, helicopters and some types of drones. It has two 23-mm barrels, which can fire at a rate of 1.6-2 thousand rounds per minute.


xcraft.net
AD
Игра с погружением в космос
Эпичные битвы в самой крутой космический стратегии
Узнать больше
ZU-23-2 anti-aircraft gun
ZU-23-2 anti-aircraft gun

Photo: RIA Novosti/Konstantin Mikhalchevsky
The ZU-23, mounted on the truck chassis, was actively used during wars and military conflicts in recent decades. It has proven to be an effective means not only against air, but also against ground targets.

If the ammunition of anti-aircraft gun mounts includes explosive ammunition, then their effectiveness will be quite high, military expert Alexei Leonkov told Izvestia.

Infographic

— У нас есть комплексы «Шилка» с четырьмя спаренными 23-мм пушками, которые работают как единое целое, — уточнил он. — Они могут поставить огневую завесу, через которую ни один дрон не пролетит. Появление маленьких БПЛА, в том числе FPV-дронов, дало вторую жизнь зенитно-пушечной артиллерии. Это направление почти исчезло, так как зенитные управляемые ракеты справлялись с множеством целей. Но как только цели стали маленькими, соотношение цены боеприпаса и беспилотника, по которому он применяется, стало в пользу БПЛА. Поэтому возврат к такому виду зенитной артиллерии — это логичный и эволюционный шаг.

По словам эксперта, эти установки важно оснастить соответствующими средствами обнаружения, так как эффективная дальность стрельбы у них ограничена двумя с половиной километрами. Также необходима постановка электронных и оптических помех.

ZSU-23-4 Shilka self-propelled anti-aircraft gun
ZSU-23-4 Shilka self-propelled anti-aircraft gun

Photo: RIA Novosti
"Attack drones use optoelectronic guidance equipment, that is, in the final section, the operator directly aims the kamikaze drone exactly at the target," explained Alexey Leonkov. "But if he flies into a smoke screen, the operator loses his bearings: he doesn't see if he's flying to the target correctly, and what if it's already moved from the point he last saw it. In electronic warfare systems, the main task is to break the connection between the operator and the drone, or eliminate it by carrying out a direct impact that will damage the electronics circuits on the drone, or to put interference over the target so that it cannot be detected, or to intercept the control signal.



etvnet.com
AD
•
16+
Сериалы, кино и ТВ в хорошем качестве
Смотреть
Inexpensive and effective
Special mobile groups to combat drones with 23-mm anti-aircraft guns are an inexpensive way to provide protection against UAVs, military expert Yuri Lyamin told Izvestia.

"All possible means are now required to defeat drones," he said. "Electronic warfare systems can crush a certain part of drones, but not all, and combat operations have shown this. It is expensive to shoot down anti-aircraft missile systems, and their ammunition is limited. And UAVs are now used in very large numbers. Because of this, the appearance of mobile groups with automatic anti-aircraft guns and machine guns is expected. The enemy began to use such measures a long time ago, he has special battalions to destroy our drones. In other countries, based on the experience of conflicts, they have also increased the number of anti-aircraft artillery to cover facilities. They are placed on pickup trucks and small trucks as a way to ensure their mobility.


How Much To Hang In Drones: How The UAV Line Has Expanded By 2024
Russian industry has mastered the production of all types of drones
During the special military operation, methods of countering enemy drones became particularly important. The troops receive anti-drone guns, drone detectors, and electronic warfare equipment.

Integrated system for protecting objects from drones "Stupor"
Integrated system for protecting objects from drones "Stupor"

Photo: Stupor LLC
In February of this year, it was reported about the introduction of the Stupor integrated system, which protects facilities from drones. It can detect and suppress drones in several ways. According to the developer's representative, Stupor is developed on the basis of complementary detection systems, such as a radar station, a radio frequency scanner, an optical drone recognition station and countermeasures.


In the NWO among strangers: Russian UAVs will receive a new recognition system
Domestic equipment will avoid "friendly fire"
The system was created taking into account the basic requirements of users and specialists of the National Guard, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, and the Russian special services. With the help of its own software, the development company combined devices operating on different principles into a system, which increased reliability and reduced the number of false positives, the developer's representative noted.

Earlier, Izvestia reported on the creation of new air defense units as part of assault units to combat drones. They will be armed with the Tor and Gibka complexes. Anti-aircraft gunners will operate in direct contact with attack aircraft, destroy enemy drones and cover infantry from the fire of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS).

I thought you're going to take a months vacation?

Mir wrote:I thought you're going to take a months vacation?

if you read properly, I said, " the conflict thread" not the other threads.

This is interesting and should be cheap and quick to implement, but a longer term solution that is rather better is needed.

A 12.7mm HMG is powerful and longer ranged, but is it better able to hit small elusive targets and would it be cheaper than a PKM?

Most drones will be vulnerable to rifle calibre machine gun fire and HMG rounds extend effective range but are they accurate enough at that extra range?

If they are not accurate at that extra range then that extra range is meaningless.

I would say stabilised remote weapon mounts with day/night all weather optics and automatic weapons would be better for the role.

In the HMG vehicle role a Tiger with a 30mm cannon with coaxial 7.62mm gun in a stabilised special high elevation mount and all weather optics... that could be used against ground targets too.

To replace that light truck with the 23mm cannon I would say that BTR with the twin single 23mm cannon with the airburst shells would be better.

These vehicles are good for a start... cheap and probably ready to go now because they probably already have them, but the problem with such vehicles is that riding through a friendly village, the enemy could send in some cheap drones to fly low and you start painting the local village with 12.7mm HMG rounds and 23mm cannon shells and even if you hit the drones you are going to tear up that village.

Equally when operating on the front line the enemy could send very low flying drones between enemy units and have them shoot each other to bits.

Cheap is a solution and in many cases it is good enough, but better solutions are shells that explode near the target so even the rounds that don't directly hit the target can do damage and help to bring the target down.

I rather suspect the ultimate solution will be a truck in the middle of the convoy or unit being protected stacked with thousands of drones with chargers with a couple of drones flying with the convoy and landing on the truck to recharge when the batteries get low to be replaced on patrol by the next drones so the convoy is constantly monitored and covered by these drones and when enemy drones are detected suicide drones are launched to directly attack the incoming enemy drone... all controlled by AI so the convoy can get on and do what it needs while a swarm of bees hover over head protecting them from enemy wasps.

Regarding AA artillery I have actually thought that you don't really need an existing vehicle/calibre combination, but standard calibres make sense.

Using a 2S35 Coalition means lots of ready to fire ammo and fully automatic auto ammo feed system with a gun with high elevation and full 360 degree traverse... and a loading vehicle already designed too.

Changing the calibre to 125mm would make the ammo smaller and lighter and presumably cheaper and airburst shells could include cannister rounds for self defence and use against enemy ground forces, and also forward cone firing claymore type shells for hitting air targets.

A 125mm gun with a Coalition length barrel should have rather impressive ballistics though it might need a thicker chamber end to take the extra pressure, but over shorter ranges a standard modern barrel could be used so that the ammo can also be fired from tanks against ground targets.

A tank could fire the rounds but against drones the lack of gun elevation would make it rather useless I suspect.

Against infantry however it would be devastating... especially if it could be fired into a group of enemy troops and exploded amongst them.

As a towed gun round it can still be hand loaded easily because of its two piece design... and if you needed higher velocity longer ranged shells then keep the 152mm gun barrel but with the 125mm calibre but use the 152mm guns propellent charge arrangement so you can use the different bag charge loads for different range shots with the extra long barrel.

If they use the 152mm coalition gun on their new destroyers then it could use this AA ammo with the 125mm shells in a 152mm sabot, or they could develop 152mm rounds as well with more shell space for fragments and control surfaces to steer after being fired to improve the chances of a kill.

To deal with drone warms, can't they just mount 5 layers of claymore mines on the bottom of a drone, and then drop them so they explode at a min safe distance from the drone, showring everything below with hot metal pieces? You can also have metal projctiles tethered with steel wire so they are dangerous to drones even when they slow down