UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News #2

What are your opinions about the difference between S-70 vs Thunder UCAV vs a possible MIG ≥10T UCAV ?
What should Russia adopt? What are the advantages of the Thunder in comparison to S-70, the price? Or anything else?

I get the feeling that the S-70 is integrated into cooperation with the Su-57 much better than any other drone likely would be, but the MiG Skat drone... seems to be over... that model they showed at MAKS of a drone was not SKAT so perhaps they have moved on and are creating a drone pair of its carrier based aircraft design and probably also for use with its land based LMFS fighter too.

In such a situation I would think there is room for multiple UCAV types with the Thunder drone likely being a useful strike drone in its own regard.

One interesting thing I did find while looking on Vitalys marvelous site was an RPG launched drone...



Found here:

https://www.vitalykuzmin.net/Military/ARMY-2017-Exhibition-pavilions/i-Pn5Qmm2/A

On a blog page regarding this UAV I found this description:

Finally, it has happened - Russian intelligence officers will receive a drone launched from a "grenade launcher", after the launch it automatically spreads its composite wings. After that, it is able to conduct a survey of the terrain for a long time, developing a speed of up to 200 km / h in flight. The flight altitude is 5000 m.

In addition to two cameras - television and thermal imaging-the cruise scout can be equipped with many other payloads, including a small-sized radar with a target detection range of up to 5 km, a communication repeater, as well as a target designation system for external strike means.
It was reported that the device will acquire the ability to independently defeat targets, for which it will be armed with onboard ammunition.

From here:

https://karelmilitary.livejournal.com/722852.html

I seem to remember an RPG-launched drone model from the 2000s or so

It's not a new concept

I seem to remember an RPG-launched drone model from the 2000s or so

It's not a new concept

They had a drone launched from a 300mm Smerch rocket shown in the mid 1990s but AFAIK it is still not an operational item... My nephew told me the Americans had a drone designed around their 40mm underbarrel grenade launcher round that could be launched 3-400m into the air and it comes down on a parachute and the operator can use a screen to see what it sees as it comes down... so you fire it directly upwards to look around your own position, or launch it into the direction of an enemy held position... when it lands it turns its downwards fisheye lens that shows a wide angle view of the ground upwards so it gives a view of what is happening around the drone after it lands too for a few minutes till the battery runs out.

These days it sounds like james bond stuff, but it is quite normal issue...

The Kronstadt company has acquired 80% of the shares of the Strela Research and Production Enterprise, which is engaged in the development and production of helicopter-type unmanned aerial vehicles.

According to the company, the drones developed by NPP Strela will be mass-produced at the Kronstadt plant in Dubna, the launch of which is scheduled for November 2021.

Universal ground control points developed in Kronstadt will be used to control both aircraft and helicopter-type UAVs

Am I right in understanding that an Orion can loiter for 24 hours but is radio guided rather than satellite guided, so it's range is otherwise limited? E.g similar range to TB2.

Lurk83 wrote:Am I right in understanding that an Orion can loiter for 24 hours but is radio guided rather than satellite guided, so it's range is otherwise limited? E.g similar range to TB2.

The version that you see above (with the "big head") has satellite connection and therefore unlimited range in what is related to guidance.

LMFS wrote:

Lurk83 wrote:Am I right in understanding that an Orion can loiter for 24 hours but is radio guided rather than satellite guided, so it's range is otherwise limited? E.g similar range to TB2.

The version that you see above (with the "big head") has satellite connection and therefore unlimited range in what is related to guidance.

Oh nice. Seemed crazy to have a predator class drone with an effective range of only 200km? Because of radio guidance.

Lurk83 wrote:Oh nice. Seemed crazy to have a predator class drone with an effective range of only 200km? Because of radio guidance.

Unfortunately, the Russian Ministry of Defense does not plan to buy a satellite-guided version of Orion...

What

Russian_Patriot_ wrote:

Lurk83 wrote:Oh nice. Seemed crazy to have a predator class drone with an effective range of only 200km? Because of radio guidance.

Unfortunately, the Russian Ministry of Defense does not plan to buy a satellite-guided version of Orion...

I'm sure it won't take too long before they change their mind. This drone would also serve well in the Naval and Border Guard role with GLONASS.
I also hope that Kronstadt will be able to have some success with that huge drone in the Maritime Patrol role for the Russian Navy.

Lurk83 wrote:What

The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation is still planning to purchase only Orions in the basic version, that is, without satellite control

Russian MoD will buy Altius with SATCOM.

It makes sense to have the non satellite version. It can loiter in a given region for hours. In a small country like Syria it is perfect.

PapaDragon wrote:

TMA1 wrote:It makes sense to have the non satellite version. It can loiter in a given region for hours. In a small country like Syria it is perfect.

Yes it does but you also need satellite version

Here in Serbia for example we can make do with non-satellite drone no problem because we are tiny but Russia isn't tiny, it's massive

Sarellites are easy to jamm.

Radio drones will be easier to control as long as they are near the radio repeater.

It is also less expensive since you don't need a satellite in the air something many countries can't afford.

Strike drones are overrated. As long as russia has enough drones for reconnaissance that arent jsmmed or destroyed it can use its overwhelming artillery superiority to destroy any targets identified. Lack of satellite comms reduces maintenance costs so there can be morr drones purchased.

I would've thought... In a situation like the Armenia/Azeri conflict, if Russia were involved it should've even relatively easy to take out the base controlling TB2 because it was so close to front lines due to TB2 short range fur to radio guidance. With SATCOM you could base them much further away feon the front lines and therefore less likely to have its command posts destroyed etc.

Lurk83 wrote:I would've thought... In a situation like the Armenia/Azeri conflict, if Russia were involved it should've even relatively easy to take out the base controlling TB2 because it was so close to front lines due to TB2 short range fur to radio guidance. With SATCOM you could base them much further away feon the front lines and therefore less likely to have its command posts destroyed etc.

I think most have made incorrect assumptions on that conflict. It was a proxy war with multiple sides deciding on what could and could not be done by both Azerbaijan and Armenia. What it did do was show that drones are very versatile and are necessary in the postmodern battlefield. What it also did though was make drones into something they are not. If one side or the other gained air dominance the drones would not have seen the same success they did. Both Russia and Turkey (and other western powers above them) kept a tight leash on the whole thing.

Yeah, when they say 250km range from the control signal the control signal could come from an aircraft or ship...

What they don't need is something they can take to Pakistan and launch from a runway and then murder Pakistanis, controlling it via satellite...

If they need to go to Syria to monitor and kill ISIS then they can fly it to Syria in a Ilyusion and fly it around the place... its enormous range meaning long endurance and ability to remain in the air for long periods of time... if they need to use it 400km away it can fly that distance and they will lose connection with it for a short period and then reacquire it as it approaches the friendly forces in the new area it will be operating in...

It is not a telecontrolled aircraft... someone isn't flying it continuously.... it can be sent to fly somewhere and store what it sees on its way and when it gets to where it is going it can start communicating with local forces and providing information and they can steer its cameras and change its waypoints etc etc.

If they are worried it might get shot down they could send an Su-30 to fly along side it and it could be controlled and manoeuvred by the guy in the back seat...

Satellite communication is not easy to jam but can be intercepted and it tells you there is a sitting duck nearby.

PapaDragon wrote:

Isos wrote:...Sarellites are easy to jamm.

Radio drones will be easier to control as long as they are near the radio repeater.

It is also less expensive since you don't need a satellite in the air something many countries can't afford.

Just because they can be jammed doesn't mean they shouldn't have them

What if there is something 300km away? Entire doctrine goes out the window

As for satellites they should just launch more if they have shortage of channels (something they should be doing anyway)

Against a real enemy your drones won't go 300 into thrir space.

If they can go there, then it means you either destroyed that enemy or you are facing a guerilla like in Syria. In both cases you will be able to secure the area and deploy radio repeater every 250km.

Satellite comms is good for big drones to send them very far away like at US coast or look for ships in the middle of the ocean.

Sure a drone with satellite guidance is better than one without it but it comes at a certain cost.

Drones are good if they are cheap. If they cost 200 million $ and get destroyed easily like US one in Iran it is useless. Better buy a tu-160 with that money.

The Russian Army is an artillery army. Every other combat arm in the Russian Army serves to either find or fix targets for the artillery or to protect it from enemy attack. A UAV with satcom is of no use to this army particularly since the long range recon capability is largely wasted - artillery being concerned primarily with objectives within the tactical depth (or rather their range dictates what is largely the tactical depth). Targets within the operational depth are handled by vastly more effective and resilient recon-strike complexes to include squadrons of fast movers and ballistic missiles paired with satellites. In this regard, the long range UAV is like a knight getting a shiny new damascus sword. Yes its great and all but the real meat and potatoes are the horseflesh and the dude that sits on top - the sword is just gravy.