UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News #3

Nice post PhSt, it seems that missile is a drone launched Kornet missile called X-BPLA.

Being launched from significant altitudes it probably could use more rocket fuel and less warhead mass because it would essentially be a top attack type weapon most of the time, meaning its substantial warhead would be overkill most of the time.

In fact I would say that Bulat reduced size missile would be a much better missile for drone use even though its range is 3.5km from 5km altitude its reduced warhead calibre should allow effective penetration of the tops of most armoured vehicles easily enough without modification.

It mentions the use of Orion type drones with these missiles in a role similar to what the Americans used predator drones with hellfire missiles in their endless wars.

The post suggests that the use of Orions signals Kievs forces no longer have the air defence capacity to defend themselves, but I would argue that Orions make sense operating at 7-8km altitude above MANPADS range where only larger systems can reach... if you operate a few of them and fit ARMs to them then any that do get shot down can distribute the target details of the platform that hit them and the rest of the drones can hunt it down.

The alternative would be to use Su-25s at altitude releasing Kornet type missiles and would not be totally safe either... drones enable the job to be done without risking pilots but killing targets on the ground, which is the important thing.

The advantage of the orions means it can fly at altitude and find targets and is large enough to carry enough ordinance to take out a few targets for itself, but of course for fixed targets it can send the coordinates to Iskander and Smerch batteries, or to alert forces on the ground.

Finding targets is valuable enough, but being able to hit targets that might otherwise get away if they had to wait for a helicopter to get there makes this useful.

Before seeing this news about the Orion, I was going to make an opinion about how Russia seems to be making advancements only in small drone classes like FPVs and Lancets.

The introduction of Medium-sized, missile carrier drones (as opposed to single-use Kamikaze drones) is certainly a welcome development.

After reading about the specs of the Orion, the basic version seems to be more or less comparable to the Predator, and has a bigger payload capacity over the Bayraktar TB2. After gathering combat experience from the SMO, the Russians can apply any lessons learned to tweak the design and capabilities of their newer UAV projects like the S-70 Okhotnik-B and Grom uav.

The advantage of the orions means it can fly at altitude and find targets and is large enough to carry enough ordinance to take out a few targets for itself, but of course for fixed targets it can send the coordinates to Iskander and Smerch batteries, or to alert forces on the ground.

Orions have an estimated payload capacity of 250 kg, Okhotnik-B has 2000 kg, and Grom has 7000 kg, maybe in the near future the latter two can replace the Su-25 in its current role of close air support, Or perhaps Russia can just make an unmanned version of the Su-25

In Kursk Su-25 should be able to fly above ukrainian forces freely and use dumb bombs from close range as it was designed for and not glide bombs.

It tells us ukrainian managed to deny the airspace there which is quite shameful for russians to be honest.

You mean like HATO in the Kosovo campaign would not send helicopters of A-10s into the conflict zone and nothing was allowed to fly below 8km altitude for fear of MANPADS threat?

When you have enemy special forces teams spread out over a 1,000km square area in small groups, it would be a challenge for any light attack aircraft... a drone will get the job done better and probably cheaper, with the small groups best engaged with small cheap guided missiles.

Kornet is rather cheap.

They stripped away the air defences from the entire country and concentrated them all in Kursk to give their guys the best air cover they could manage.

For Russia it is an opportunity to test new drones and new drone weapons as well as hunting techniques...

Such drones would also be useful in COIN operations amongst friendlies where targets need to be confirmed before being engaged before they can disappear.

The introduction of Medium-sized, missile carrier drones (as opposed to single-use Kamikaze drones) is certainly a welcome development.

It hasn't been a huge priority so far because as the Bakraytr has shown, such large drones are horribly vulnerable to conventional air defence systems that can spot them at long range and easily engage them because they don't have tiny RCS and tiny IIR signatures that make them hard to spot, and they are not physically small and easy and cheap to mass produce making shooting them down with missiles too expensive to be viable.

Conversely with decent optics and sensors they can fly high and be very cheap to operate and be able to loiter for very long periods looking for targets.

Being able to carry tiny guided bombs and missiles makes them able to react quickly to opportunities to hit targets that might not remain vulnerable for long enough to get a platform there to engage like a jet or helicopter.

A 20kg or 10kg bomb delivered with accuracy or an ATGM with guidance allowing direct hits means you don't need huge weapons... from 8-10km altitude glide kits and guided bombs or missiles would have good range and performance... the enemy might not even know you are there.

Orions have an estimated payload capacity of 250 kg, Okhotnik-B has 2000 kg, and Grom has 7000 kg, maybe in the near future the latter two can replace the Su-25 in its current role of close air support, Or perhaps Russia can just make an unmanned version of the Su-25

The CAS role is changing... a 250kg dumb bomb is cheap and putting a glide kit on it does not make it a lot more expensive, yet transforms it into a guided weapon that can be delivered from a much safer distance than a standard iron bomb.

Optical sensors (TV and IIR) as well as other sensors (LIDAR and AESA radar) can create very detailed views of the ground from substantial distances and altitudes.

We have seen they are talking about recon platforms like the M-17RM operating at 20km altitude and newer systems potentially including aerostats and airships operating up to 50km altitude searching the ground for targets and threats, as well as operating drones operating at lower altitudes also looking for targets and marking targets etc etc, so the finding of targets might be transferred to these platforms meaning the flying low and slow over the battlefield role might be replaced by hanging back and launching standoff cheap munitions like bombs with glide kits and missiles further back from the front line.

For that sort of thing a MiG-35 would be more use than a subsonic Su-25... being able to take off from forward airfields or sections of motor way, and being able to climb to altitude and high speed would extend the effective range of glide bombs and standoff missiles. Their AESA radar would enable them to also scan for enemy air power to cover the recon assets too... but of course medium range drones with AAMs and ARMS to deal with enemy air threats by themselves and also with ground based air defences would allow them to operate for longer periods.

Perhaps their more expensive sensors on the recon platforms can be pod mounted with glide kits to make them fly to friendly held territory if the aircraft is hit and brought down in combat so they can be recovered and reused... and also for various types of aircraft to use the pod mounted systems for recon roles... including light transport types and jet trainers.

Actually I just remembered they have laser guided 80mm rockets they can load into rocket pods... I seem to remember they have a 7 shot 80mm rocket pod as well as the two 20 shot pods for fast and slow aircraft.

With laser guidance each rocket should be a direct hit, and with the small rocket pods for light aircraft a pair of rocket pods would have 14 rockets ready to launch... so it could include, say 10 laser guided S-8L rockets whose 6kg warhead could be designed to penetrate roof armour of vehicles but also have a good blast radius with fragments for groups of troops or soft vehicles. The other 4 rockets could be short range suicide drones they developed.

They could be carried and used from high altitude... perhaps a custom designed pod that can be angled downwards so the drone does not have to keep entering dives to launch these rockets at targets on the ground below.

Those new flat box shaped rocket pods would be even more interesting.... you could incorporate a small gas charge to blow the rockets out of the tubes like a mortar so the rocket pods could be located on the belly surface of the drones... recessed into the drone so you get zero drag in flight... to launch turn the drone towards the target and lower the front of the pod down up to 30 degrees and fire a gas cannister to blow the rocket out of the tube and then light up the rocket motor after 1 second so it can get clear of the drone... then retract the launcher while you guide the laser homing rocket or suicide drone using laser target marking to ensure the correct target gets hit.

They have upgraded and improved the 57mm rockets too and they would be good for use against convoys of light vehicles like MRAPS and jeeps and unarmoured trucks... a rocket per vehicle. You could carry more 57mm rockets... which could perhaps be modified to have commonality with the HE warheads of the 57mm grenade launcher rounds for serial mass production... used in unguided and guided aerial rockets from air and ground platforms and as the standard armament of ground based BMPs...

Zlatti71
@Zlatti_71
Russian Engineers Develop New Technology to Counter Drones

Russian designers have developed a cutting-edge technology called "sliding interference," which disrupts the connection between UAVs and their operators. Once control is lost, the drone switches to self-rescue mode and returns to its launch point.

The "sliding interference" technology, developed by the company *Stupor*, is designed to combat Ukrainian drones, regardless of the enemy’s frequent changes in radio frequencies. It provides layered protection against drones. This was reported by a representative of *Stupor* to TASS.

The technology is already being used by Russian forces in the Zaporizhzhia direction, disrupting radio signals and preventing the enemy from effectively utilizing drones.
- AN

Ali Anim
@animmufeedh
How did they manage to cool the receiver? This is not new technology, Russians were seen using this tech to intercept and broadcast video to drone operators before, but they he devise would overheat very quickly
9:54 AM · Sep 12, 2024
·
115
 Views

Their experience will help them decide what is difficult to defend against and what is not difficult.

Cost will also be a factor... making things cheap and easy to mass produce makes them even more potent.

I would say there are two components to the Su-25s capabilities that make it useful... slow enough to find targets on the ground but fast enough to not be a sitting duck for them and to be able to reach targets and then leave.

The CAS concept is based around subsonic aircraft that can get in close and absorb a bit of damage... find their targets and hit them directly with cheap dumb ordinance and then leave before sustaining fatal damage.

Even now they are looking at high altitude (20km to 50km altitude) recon platforms that can operate over the battlefield finding targets and monitoring enemy forces and operations... if you can partner that with armed medium altitude drones that can carry decent payloads but operate above enemy short range firepower, together with suicide drones that are essentially guided platforms with a built in warhead... much like a Kh-38 or Kh-29 but launched from further back, or for smaller lighter targets that don't require essentially a 250-300kg HE bomb then small glide bombs and guided rockets that are precise to hit individual positions or vehicles, then the role of an Su-25 starts to fade.

Once you find the target and can precision mark it, using a high flying platform like an airship or aircraft for the former and maybe a medium altitude drone to mark the target, then a tiny bomb or missile from bomb or missile truck UAVs could be flown through the combat zone releasing weapons on target coordinated with the marking platform. Lofting rockets and releasing bombs from standoff ranges with glide kits does not need subsonic speeds so something like a 4th or 5th gen light fighter could climb and accelerate and release weapons from quite significant stand off distances and the target wont know the difference as to whether an Su-25 delivered the ordinance or it came by MiG-35 or Su-35 or Su-57.

The standoff launch range means whatever is delivering the ordinance is relatively safe and can engage multiple targets, so delivering cheap dumb bombs with glide kits makes it affordable too.... so whether the launch platform is an Su-25 or Su-24 or Su-34 or Su-35 or Su-57 doesn't matter a huge amount... except the Su-34 and Su-35 and Su-57 would be better used for more demanding roles.

Using something like a MiG-35 with an AESA radar and modern IIR optics means it can deliver standoff attacks but also scan the battlefield for targets which can be shared with ground forces in real time so they can find and select their own targets for the aircraft to attack.

Together with all this of course the ground forces will have drones that are also attacking targets and I suspect a drone force operating at different depths on the battlefield controlled by AI will also be hunting and attacking targets through the depths of the enemy lines.

Ha ha ha... which caused both civilian and military casualties and then shows an apartment block with a big chunk blown out of its side from an attack I remember the Orcs blamed on Russia but it turned out the damage was caused by an S-300 missile that lost target lock and didn't self destruct.

1:52

Then American expert tells us Russia is no longer dependent on Iranian long range drones and can now make their own... pompus arse hole...

Could say when the British put their merlin engine into a mediocre American plane, the result was the Mustang... America had learned that a decent engine can make any piece of shit a good fighter. When the Americans saw the MiG-25, they copied the layout and came up with the F-15, so they learned aircraft design from the Soviets and engine design from the British... is there anything they can do on their own... oh yes... the F-35... hahahaha.

And then the claim that Iran was sending drones to Russia... if that was the case then why did they wait so long to start using them?

The Russians tested Shahed drones in Syria and signed contracts to serial produce them in Russia... they didn't use them from day one because they were completing the factories that were making them and getting production up to a useful rate... plus training their troops to use them effectively takes time.

All this information from Reuters is amusing considering they are a branch of western intelligence services and have been working for them for decades and cannot be trusted at all to do anything except push the party line that Russia is weak and uses Iranian drones... because if HATO is running out of everything then they must be too... Except Russia has plenty of oil and gas and Uranium and Titanium and Nickel...

All those parts bought from China for general civil purpose... it is a civil duty of any human being to deliver explosives to kill nazis.

It is funny the west demands China stop sending material to Russia because they might use that material in the Ukraine... does that mean Russia and China should stop supplying rare earth metals to the west because their products might be sent to the Ukraine too?

Western sanctions on Russia are illegal and unilateral and should be ignored by all countries that are independent and can withstand the bullying of the evil empire of the west.

Its possible that some parts of this so-called intelligence info are just made up by NATO to accuse China of helping Russia and put pressure on the former to stop further cooperation with Russia.

As for Russia, I believe it's more practical to produce the drones inside Russian territory instead of China (which I think is the case for this particular drone, NATO just claimed it was produced in China for propaganda purposes).
Russia can set up the factory somewhere in Siberia or Far East to be safe from any long range NATO/ Ukrainian drone attacks.

As for the specs of this Harpy-3 drone, it looks similar to the capabilities of the Geran-2, same warhead capacity (50kg) and range (2,000+ km). It would be interesting to know what Russia made different with this drone

Russia has a variety of MALE and HALE drones in the works... but why would they make them in China?

Stupid Reuters muddying the waters so that when Russia reveals a new Russian long range drone they can claim it is half Chinese because Russia can't make them on their own.

A few new engines that are being perfected are delaying a few of the larger Russian drones... for example the Altius uses an engine also used for light aircraft and helicopters...

They have not said very much about their S-62 stealthy HALE drone, which might use the SM-100 engine based on the engine for the Yak-130 perhaps?

This drone is rather interesting and cool too... and if you think about it... being able to launch it from a tube on the front line... you could easily attach that tube to a 57mm or an 80mm rocket that could be launched ahead a few kms into enemy territory to then deploy and fly around finding targets.



Important to point out that tiny drones like this are hard to spot on any radar or thermal device because their RCS and IR signature are tiny.

The best way to detect such targets is with active sensors like LIDAR... and a powerful laser could be used to defeat them too.

While large UAVs are vulnerable to air defence systems you can also use them in such a way that they do become useful... ie as bait for a trap.

Having a platform like a MiG-31BM or Su-57 operating you could launch a couple of large drones like Orion and equip them with self defence weapons, but having a drone like GROM that can carry anti radiation missiles like Kh-31 or Kh-58 would be more useful... send the Orion into enemy airspace and use it to monitor enemy forces... to shoot such a target down you would need to launch missiles at it... detecting such launches and the signals used for the attack to allow a launch of anti radiation missiles to defeat the air defence system could be used as a trap, whether at large standoff range with a MiG-31BM carrying the ARMs or a Grom with the anti radiation weapons.

To increase the survivability of the original drone you would need to fit it with a rather decent self defence avionics suite... like the ESM pods for the Yak-130 with DIRCMS, and perhaps also self defence jammers and decoys as developed for the Iskander system that the Orion could release to improve its chances of survival.

Obviously an Orion sized drone is too expensive to be expendible, so it needs to be made even more expensive to make it more survivable... but expendable jammers can be fitted to cruise missiles and ballistic missiles and other platforms including helicopters so the cost of them will go down with the volume that are being produced and used. Of course as they are examined by the enemy they will need improvement and upgrades, which can be applied to all users. Some upgrades can just be software based so you can upgrade the decoys without needing to replace them all.

Someone saw the videos last week or so (Military Update) showing some russian helicopter drone launching
unguided rockets at targets in the Zaporoshye region?

This video starts discussing a revival of using airships and balloons in Russia but most of the rest is about medium sized UAVs like the Orion drone..

This is a net firing drone used to capture enemy drones, which can be recovered and repaired and used against the former users.

As it mentions the US and Ukraine have copied its design already too.



Was going to post in the thread on ways to defeat a drone swarm but this would not be so good for dealing with enormous numbers of enemy drones.

It really does need to hover very close above the target to be effective.

Most drones don't have cameras that can see upwards so it is effective.