A new version of the loitering ammunition "Lancet" began to be used during the NWO in Ukraine

The units of the Russian army participating in a special military operation in Ukraine began to use modernized drones-kamikaze "Lancet". The increased power warhead allows you to deal more damage than the basic version drone.

A modernized version of the Lancet loitering munition entered service with Russian troops participating in a special operation in Ukraine. Unlike the basic version, the new kamikaze drone has an increased flight duration and a large mass of the warhead. According to an informed source, the new "Lancet" can stay in the air for up to one hour, and the mass of the warhead is 5 kg, which makes it possible to hit enemy armored vehicles and personnel.

Russian troops in Ukraine have begun using upgraded Lancet loitering munitions with an increased flight duration of one hour and a more powerful warhead weighing more than five kilograms, which is at least two kilograms more than the basic version of the drone

- leads RIA News source words.

The fact that Russia has created a deeply modernized version of the loitering ammunition "Lancet" was reported in February of this year, just before the start of a special operation in Ukraine. At the same time, it became known that the new kamikaze drone was tested in Syria, but the developer did not disclose the characteristics of the drone. It was known that the new version of the "Lancet" differs from the base model with "updated aerodynamics" - the drone was equipped with one large X-shaped wing and an X-shaped plumage in the tail section, while the previous model had two symmetrical X-shaped wings. In addition, the modernized "Lancet-3" received a warhead of increased power, as well as an increased range and duration of flight.

In the basic version, the "Lancet-3" has a take-off weight of 12 kg, while the mass of the warhead is 3 kg, which is reflected in the title. Speed ​​from 80 to 110 km / h, can hit targets within a radius of 40 km from the operator. For guidance, three systems are used: coordinate, with the help of optoelectronic means and combined. The drone is equipped with a television channel that transmits an image of the target and allows you to confirm its defeat. The fuse is pre-contact.

Comments

[Vladimir Vladimirovich Vorontsov]

Russian troops in Ukraine began to use modernized loitering ammunition "Lancet"

***
Syringe,... clamp,... tweezers,..."Lancet"...
Operation!
***

[Russian]

After all, we are carrying out a surgical operation to separate the gene of Nazism

[neworange88]

Russian troops in Ukraine have begun using upgraded Lancet loitering munitions with an increased flight duration of one hour and a more powerful warhead weighing more than five kilograms, which is at least two kilograms more than the basic version of the drone

- RIA Novosti quotes the words of the source.

Well, not bad. The range of destruction, taking into account the flight time of 1 hour, probably reaches at least 80 km.

Addendum to the above information.

In particular, drones are being used against Ukrainian troops entrenched in open-type fortifications, hiding in forest plantations or houses, according to howitzer crews as part of counter-battery combat.

For strikes against manpower, "Lancets" with a high-explosive fragmentation or thermobaric warhead are used, against armored vehicles - with a cumulative warhead.

The upgraded version of the Lancet drone received new aerodynamics - now the device has one large X-shaped wing and an X-shaped plumage in the tail. The basic version of the Lancet, which was previously shown to the public, has two symmetrical X-shaped wings.


Source: https://rusvesna.su/news/1658383058

[NIKN]

More lancets good and different! But all the same, they can be used against explored targets, which means there are more reconnaissance comrades for them, because it is impractical to launch them for the purpose of searching. As a result, a pair of drone + Lancet on a detected target will have a lethal force, since the target will not go far from the place of detection.

[North Caucasus]

Well then, a balloon on a leash with a package of rockets! Especially if the ball is multi-section, then it will be very difficult to knock it down. When breaking through one or more sections, the rest will hold it.

[Ablet]

Zala has drones 421-16E and 421-16E2 for this, most likely they find targets. They are also electric like lancets and cubes, but they rise to 5000m and can fly for about 3 hours.
It's a pity that Zala doesn't make a lancet or a cube for air launch, and not from a catapult. Then it would be possible to increase both the speed and the warhead, it would be possible to hunt for the Hymars.

[NIKN]

There was also a thought, how to get hamers, but those from hundreds of kilometers apparently plan to be based, perhaps the lancet is at the limit even after target designation, and for additional reconnaissance (and in an hour they go wherever they go, there is not enough battery.

[Ablet]

Additional reconnaissance while cubes and lancets are flying at Zala continues to do 421-16, it's like a single complex.
With an air launch from a height of 4000 m of reinforced lancets and cubes, it would be possible to increase their speed to 300 km/h, range to 70-120 km, warhead to 7 kg, with the drone's own weight of about 35-50 kg. A more serious thing than LMUR. Even the Yak-52 could act as a carrier of such drones.

[Dost]

Or the same Su-25

[Ablet]

The Su-25 is unlikely to fit, since for this it is necessary to make a million approvals from the Russian Aerospace Forces. But Zala aero can buy a Yak-52 somewhere and integrate its equipment there, or use its large Zala 421-20 drone for this purpose. But using the Yak-52, in my opinion, is much easier for quick implementation. Zala aero makes a single decision - he found the target himself, destroyed it himself. There, the task is to circle with several drones under the wings at an altitude of 4000m for 3 hours, about 10 km from the contact line.

[Andriuha077]

Pacer
flight altitude: 7500 m
flight duration: 24 hours (with a load of 60 kg),
Two units and good optics.
Messenger-M
The radius will be sufficient.
Ten units including:
- two guidance stations;
- ten local repeaters;
- 36 units of this ammunition.

[Ablet]

Zala aero makes ITS OWN integrated solution of UAV for reconnaissance (421-16, etc.) + UAV for attack (cube, lancet), and "Kronshtadt" with Inokhodets is more of a competitor for them, there are no friends in business. But they (Zala aero) know how to make large UAVs, which means they can make an air barge for cubes and lancets themselves. In addition, this will allow them to be used deeper from the line of combat contact. The use of the Yak-52 or something similar as a barge at the initial stage could accelerate the emergence of faster and more powerful lancets and cubes.

[Andriuha077]

Here it is important for the customer to initially resolutely avoid a new round of such a medieval phenomenon, diversity.

[stankow]

Tornado will take care of the Hymars. Or Tornado-S. Won't be left unattended

[dauria]

The range of destruction, taking into account the flight time of 1 hour, probably reaches at least 80 km.

Will you be able to transmit the image? Especially when the drone descends to at least 100 m when attacking the target. The Earth is round, you know. No way without a repeater. Or raise the operator's antenna as much as 100 m. And for 3 kg to be of use, you need to hit the bull's eye. Well, and if using known coordinates - then why a loitering one with a motor? An MLRS projectile with GLONASS correction is simpler, faster and more powerful. Here, a bundle of a small disposable reconnaissance aircraft and an MLRS installation will probably work.
Is it possible to let these Lancets in a pair. One attacks, the second hangs with a repeater, and then dives after it as it will.

[navigator777]

The antenna is not difficult to raise with a kite or balloon

[Alex_Bora]

Quote: navigator777

The antenna is not difficult to raise with a kite or balloon

You need to raise not only the antenna, but the receiver, transmitter, amplifier, power supply or power cable - all together - a repeater

[Dost]

at the 2018 World Cup, this was done by airships. And here you can adapt.

[Edik]

Quote: dauria

Can you send a picture? Especially when the drone drops down to at least 100 m when attacking a target. The earth is round, you know. No repeater. Or lift the operator's antenna as much as 100 m.

Range "Lancet" 40km
.

Quote: dauria

Well, if according to known coordinates, then why loitering with a motor?

For an accurate hit on enemy equipment.

[neworange88]

And in order to make sense from 3 kg, you need to hit the bull's-eye.

From what 3 kg? More than 5 kg. Quote.

"Lancet" with an increased flight duration of one hour and a more powerful warhead, the mass of which is more than five kilograms

Can you send a picture? Especially when the drone drops down to at least 100 m when attacking a target. The earth is round, you know. No repeater.

How then is the picture transmitted by Product 305, X-29TD, X-59M2 without a repeater?

Video of the impact on the bridge at the link below.

“This is the work of the Kh-59M2 missile with a television, let’s say, “zerolux” homing head. That is, a homing head that works both during the day and in very low light. But not at night. In this case, the navigator did not choose the bridge deck as a target, because three and a half hundred striking elements for such a bridge are not enough, but it is quite enough to break the cables in the lifting tower, drop the load and block the movement of power ships, ”the Telegram channel reports. Fighter bomber.

https://avia.pro/news/udar-krylatoy-raketoy-h-59m2-po-vazhnomu-strategicheskomu-obektu-ukrainy-pokazali-na-video

[Alexey RA]

Quote from: neworange88

How then is the picture transmitted by Product 305, X-29TD, X-59M2 without a repeater?

It's very simple - there the receiver is raised above the ground to the height of the carrier's flight.
In addition, the product 305 has a range of only about 15 km. Yes, and Kh-29 left not far from her.

[neworange88]

The Kh-29TD has a range of about 30 km, in addition, the new thermal imaging head makes it possible to use this missile at night.

[dauria]

How then is the picture transmitted by Product 305, X-29TD, X-59M2 without a repeater?

So there is a plane. And then this is a television seeker, after target designation it does not transmit anything. It simply flies to the target using the picture indicated by it as a reference. Calculates with tricky mathematics (I remember the teacher's clever phrase "Kalman-Bucy filtering" ) the degree of "similarity" of the picture and turns it further, if necessary. At the same time, as it approaches and changes scale, it updates the standard. And modern ones are even simpler. "Fly over there, you'll figure it out on the spot yourself. I gave you the pictures, look for them."
By the way, the "head with an eye" X29-t really turned behind the drawn bridge on the drawing paper. It looked creepy, especially 40 years ago.

[neworange88]

And then this is a television seeker, after target designation it does not transmit anything. It simply flies to the target using the picture indicated by it as a reference.

You messed up something. Video of the strike on the bridge, transmitted by the television seeker of the Kh-59M2 missile during the strike of this missile on the bridge.



Here is the video. It turns out that the television GOS is transmitting video.

[Alex_Bora]

How then is the picture transmitted by Product 305, X-29TD, X-59M2?

They transmit the picture to the carrier, and not to the drone's ground control station. And the carrier is much higher than her.
The range of the radio horizon depends on the heights of the transmitter and receiver.

[Paladin]

Can you send a picture? Especially when the drone drops down to at least 100 m when attacking a target

Are you not familiar with concepts such as target acquisition at the operator's command and homing?

[North Caucasus]

What about the picture? The United States is transmitting real-time data from the APU from satellites. So far, they are silent about our satellites with the transmission of information in real time. Apparently we do not have such an opportunity (satellites). And like Musk, if necessary, we cannot launch a bundle of satellites either. Although we have intercontinental missiles with nuclear warheads. But we cannot launch a simple product, reconnaissance satellites, if necessary. So the front commander decided to find out the situation, but how? And if possible, launched the intercontinent and brought out a whole bunch of observation satellites! But there are no satellites, no drones, there are hemorrhoids. And the militias begin to make various stray things on their knees. And once they promised that each fighter would have a suit (it seems the Warrior) that would transmit information and each combat unit would transmit and receive operational information. Judging by the news, I understand that Turkey, Iran and China have drones. Both the Armed Forces of Ukraine and our army buy drones from China. The lancet is really a modernized American.

[Sexton]

The newest UAV "Orlan-30" has the ability to transmit real-time images for only 10 km, and with a special antenna with a narrow beam pattern and a rotary mechanism up to 30 km, the latter is very rare.

If it is necessary to receive a television image at the NPU from the UAV, the workstation is equipped with the ground part of the television system with a directional antenna at a distance of up to 10 km and a narrowly directed antenna system with a servo drive for ranges of up to 30 km.

And in all the descriptions, an incomprehensible figure of 120 km is indicated, but this is the range of the radio channel for transmitting UAV flight parameters, for recording the route and transmitting commands...

CHARACTERISTICS OF UAV "ORLAN-30"
Maximum takeoff weight, kg 31
Payload mass, kg 6
Flight altitude range, m 300-5000
Maximum flight altitude (above sea level), m 5000
Range of flight speeds, km / h 80-150
Maximum range of information transmission, km 120
Maximum range of the control channel, km 120

http://nevskii-bastion.ru/orlan-30/
TLG has a video of an Orlan UAV operator who came under enemy mortar fire! Where is 30 km? Only 10 km!

[North Caucasus]

Something small is 1 hour flight. Theoretically, they can hang for months if air refueling is applied. And if he will be related to doaustim at 6 meters, turn off the engine and plan in a spiral up to 000 meters, start the engine and climb again. With such a flight, you can save fuel well. The flying tanker is also a drone. He flew up, refueled, the tanker flew away, and this one continues to hang on duty.

[stankow]

Manilovshchina

[Sexton]

The range of destruction, taking into account the flight time of 1 hour, probably reaches at least 80 km.

They wrote to you in the article:
can hit targets within a radius of 40 km from the operator.
Judging by the video of combat use:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWKeE2XQmd0
this UAV is not used independently, other UAVs or scouts on the ground are looking for targets for it.
Since the kamikaze drone is not equipped with a Glonas navigator, it is not clear how it will reach the point of application. The manufacturer does not disclose this nuance.
At the maximum range, the drone flies up to 30 minutes and uses preliminary reconnaissance. US "Krasnopol" of new modifications with target designation from the same UAV will arrive much faster and the range of application is the same.
"Lancet" is a weapon of sabotage and special operations, but the huge dimensions and conditions of use (transport, catapult, additional reconnaissance UAV, deployment time, flight time) make even this option questionable...

[musketon64]

Quote: Sexton

US "Krasnopol" of new modifications with target designation from the same UAV will arrive much faster and the range of application is the same.

Since the "Krasnopol" is still an adjustable projectile, it is designed to hit stationary targets. And the kamikaze drone is loitering ammunition and is more flexible in striking a moving target. For example, he discovered himself by launching missiles and fleeing HIMARS. The Lancet located in this area has a much better chance of hitting the target than the corrected ammunition.

[Sexton]

You are missing one moment. Even if the Lancet is deployed and ready for use, it will fly for tens of minutes after the start, and the US is much faster ...

[musketon64]

Quote: Sexton

You are missing one moment. Even if the Lancet is deployed and ready for use, it will fly for tens of minutes after the start, and the US is much faster ...

The point here is that the "Lancet" should ALREADY be located and patrolling approximately in this area and search for a target or wait for target designation from another UAV. The "Krasnopol" projectile is guided, not controlled, and will not be able to hit a moving target or one that has moved hundreds of meters away from the combat position at the moment of firing a cor/projectile from an artillery mount.
With the "Lancet" there is a saying that it should be "in the right place at the right time", and not work on the target purposefully (although this option is also possible). This is how the higher-speed "Germes" missile should work.

[DO]

The "Lancet" should ALREADY be located and loitering approximately in this area and look for a target or wait for target designation from another UAV.

How to provide this most "ALREADY"?
Perhaps so. The priority target is mobile MLRS installations, barrel artillery. Using reconnaissance means (acoustic, drones, DLRO, satellites, etc.), the approximate location of the target is determined (approximate primarily because the targets are mobile). After that, if the target is not detected by a reconnaissance drone that has a television connection with the operator in real time, several required reconnaissance drones are quickly delivered to this square by jet aircraft, and high-altitude repeater drones are additionally suspended for communication with the operator. After detecting a mobile target and starting to track it, Lancets are quickly delivered to the required point - installed instead of MLRS warheads, at long ranges - dropped by jet aircraft, or fired from the onboard NURS installations of a jet aircraft. The Lancets then spend their range resource under the control of reconnaissance drones that track the target and provide target designation to the Lancets, either directly or through operators.

[musketon64]

You described a very complex interaction scheme of various means: jet aircraft, MLRS, reconnaissance UAVs, repeaters, kamikaze drones, and their operators... Just getting jet aircraft into the air is quite a task... both in terms of reaction time and in coordinating its work with ground and artillery units. For example, back during the Vietnam War, the Americans, in order to reduce the reaction time of attack aircraft, specially developed propeller-driven attack aircraft that patrolled (hung) in the air, rather than standing at an airbase, awaiting a command to immediately head to a particular square, where they would already receive target designation from forward air controllers.
As I understand it, kamikaze drones have roughly the same purpose - to patrol a specific area and either independently search for a target, or receive guidance from other, more advanced reconnaissance systems during patrolling. And then, as it turns out, in order of priority of hitting targets - either an MLRS launcher, or an ATGM crew, or some other truck with ammunition.

[DO]

You described a very complex scheme of interaction between various means: jet aircraft, MLRS, reconnaissance UAVs, repeaters, kamikaze drones, and their operators ...

And who said that fighting effectively is easy? The Americans have proven the benefits of the network-centric concept.
==

As I understand it, kamikaze drones have about the same purpose - to patrol in a specific square and either search for a target on their own, or, while loitering, get a tip from other, more advanced reconnaissance services.

Kamikaze drones are not suitable as a means of reconnaissance. For they fly but an hour and do not return; putting advanced reconnaissance equipment on a disposable device is ruinous. That is, if drones are used to reconnoiter targets, then long-flying ones specialized for this, with good sensors and communication channels.
However, for such a long NVO front line, for reconnaissance only with drones, you can’t stock up on drones. God forbid they will buy them and eventually produce more.
To deliver drones to the required point, it is jet aircraft that is preferable, because for mobile purposes, the minimum delivery time is of great importance. If, at the same time, kamikaze drones from the NURS are fired along a hinged trajectory from a jet delivery aircraft, this will allow the aircraft not to enter the target air defense zone.

[DO]

PS Or drop kamikaze drones from a great height and speed, according to the principle of gliding bombs.
For the lack of the number of reconnaissance drones and their control points, one has to pay the price of organizing a quick delivery (based on intelligence information received by other means), of them and repeaters, to the required points of an extended front line.

[musketon64]

Here is an article on VO on this topic, with comments.
"Advantages of loitering ammunition IAI Harop".
https://topwar.ru/179697-preimuschestva-barrazhirujuschego-boepripasa-iai-harop.html
A small excerpt from the article:
“The main advantages of the IAI Harop ammunition should be sought at the level of the basic concept. The idea of ​​loitering ammunition suggests the creation of a “kamikaze drone” capable of observing and hitting the target found “at the cost of its own life.” Loitering ammunition can become a full-fledged replacement for reconnaissance UAVs with close In this case, data from Harop can be used to clarify the situation or to issue target designation to fire weapons.The device can be integrated into modern troop control loops with maximum results.
Unlike reconnaissance drones, loitering ammunition is capable of not only identifying a target, but also hitting it on its own. This dramatically reduces the time required to destroy a given object - in contrast to traditional approaches using specialized systems and complexes.

Kamikaze drones are not suitable as a means of reconnaissance. For they fly but an hour and do not return; putting advanced reconnaissance equipment on a disposable device is ruinous.

And more about Hero.
https://topwar.ru/76068-izrail-razrabotal-bespilotnik-kamikadze.html
"The drone is launched using a portable pneumatic launcher. Cross-shaped wings provide super-maneuverability of this drone, capable of flying low over difficult terrain or avoiding obstacles. The operating height is 300-600 meters. The Hero-30 is able to "lead" the target day and night with the help a small rotating camera, transmitting information to the operator, who may be at a distance of several tens of kilometers (the maximum distance today is 40 km), and waiting for the command to “attack”, ”the Israeli portal reports.
The operator has the opportunity, after receiving the necessary information, to interrupt the “mission” and RETURN THE DEVICE to the base. For a soft landing, a special net is used. The developers guarantee uninterrupted operation of the electric motor for 30 minutes.

To deliver drones to the required point, it is jet aircraft that is preferable, because the minimum delivery time is of great importance.

In this conflict, Russian jet aircraft are trying not to fly over enemy territory due to the unsuppressed Ukrainian air defense. That is, the "required delivery point" will end up somewhere over their own territory. And what's the point of launching an entire plane? They (drones) can be launched with the same success from a regular launcher from the same area.

[DO]

The operator has the opportunity, after receiving the necessary information, to interrupt the “mission” and RETURN THE DEVICE to the base.

Even if the developers make the Lancets returnable, the 60 minutes of flight, including reconnaissance and return home (failure to find a target in such a short time is very likely), is so short that priority targets (MLRS, long-range barrel artillery) in many cases will be inaccessible to kamikaze drones. Therefore, normal reconnaissance drones will still be needed (medium reconnaissance drones can also carry a bomb or a missile).

Russian jet aircraft in this conflict, due to unsuppressed Ukrainian air defense, are trying not to fly over enemy territory. That is, the "required delivery point" will be somewhere above its territory. And what's the point of launching a whole plane?

But nevertheless, Russian aviation works in the Northern Military District. And is the task of destroying a MLRS installation or an American howitzer unworthy of an aircraft taking off?

They (drones) can be launched with the same success from a conventional launcher from the same area.

Who would argue. However, this is true only if the drone and launcher are available in this very area. Which in reality is not always the case.

[DO]

P. S2.
In some cases, it may be effective to control kamikaze drones not from a ground point, but by the second crew member-operator of the aircraft, who dropped/fired the kamikaze drone(s).

[DO]

P. S3. More precisely, give the kamikaze drone the right direction, compensating for the pointing error in the desired square, and transfer control.

[musketon64]

Quote: DO

...... priority targets (MLRS, long-range cannon artillery) in many cases will be inaccessible to kamikaze drones.

For some reason, in your theses you emphasize that kamikaze drones are designed specifically to hit targets, including for counter-battery warfare. But they are still primarily a means of reconnaissance, and attacking a target (if it is detected) is only a limited task. Depending on the importance of the target, which must be destroyed immediately before it leaves its position (mobile installation). Because directing aircraft or artillery - this takes time. And mortars may not reach. A kamikaze drone is still not a "loitering" (capable of retargeting in flight) ATGM, like the Israeli Spike or the French MMR. They are definitely disposable.

Quote: DO

In some cases, it may be effective to control kamikaze drones not from a ground point, but by the second crew member-operator of the aircraft, who dropped/fired the kamikaze drone(s).

Well, I don’t know .... Recently, there has been a trend towards the “fire (drop) and forget” scheme. You are proposing to drop UAVs, and even control them. Such a maneuver is dangerous for an airplane and a helicopter when controlling even high-speed missiles, and here are low-speed drones. This is how long they need to hang in the air, look for a target through the drone's camera and then direct it to the target? This task is best handled by an ordinary ground operator from a camouflaged shelter, without the risk of losing an expensive aircraft.

[DO]

For some reason, in your theses, you emphasize that kamikaze drones are sharpened precisely to hit targets, including for and for counter-battery combat. But they are still primarily reconnaissance, and the attack of the target (if it is detected) is already insofar as.

Today's Russian Lancet is a disposable guided munition designed to destroy mobile targets inaccessible to artillery. And the IED artillery, as the experience of the SVO has shown, is the main threat to the RF Armed Forces and the civilian population of the liberated territories. Accordingly, counter-battery combat against mobile MLRS installations and self-propelled howitzers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is a priority.
And the reconnaissance tool from Lancet kamikaze drones, flying for only an hour, is very worthless.
For reconnaissance, other drones are needed that fly 24 hours, with good optics and secure broadband observation and control channels, specially designed for reconnaissance and developed. There is a global trend of arming scouts with small bombs and rackets. Maybe think about arming the average scout with the smallest Lancet. Plus, of course, repeater drones that provide the necessary control range and safe placement of the control point.

Recently, there has been a trend towards the "shoot (drop) and forget" scheme. You are proposing to drop UAVs, and even control them. Such a maneuver is dangerous for an airplane and a helicopter when controlling even high-speed missiles, and here are low-speed drones.

Perhaps you are right, practice will show.

[musketon64]

Quote: DO

Today's Russian Lancet is a disposable guided munition designed to destroy mobile targets inaccessible to artillery.

I agree about this particular "Lancet". But I do not see any obstacles to turn it into a reusable return type of Hero. Moreover, as you rightly noted above:

Even if the developers make the Lancets returnable, 60 minutes of flight, including reconnaissance and returning home (failure to find a target in such a short time is very likely), is so small that priority targets (MLRS, long-range cannon artillery) in many cases will be inaccessible to kamikaze drones .

For counter-battery warfare, special radars with computing systems have been developed that are capable of detecting an artillery shell flying in the air and quickly calculating the location of the firing guns based on its trajectory and providing data for the means of destruction (own artillery or MLRS). This method is especially good for working against towed artillery (such as the M777), but not so good for armored self-propelled guns. Although if a large-caliber shell "falls" in the immediate vicinity of it and does not destroy it, it will disable the installation. But options with "self-aiming" combat elements of MLRS missiles are also possible.
This method of counter-battery combat, in my opinion, is more preferable than the use of UAVs for various purposes. Insofar as these devices (especially medium-range ones) can be detected and shot down by air defense systems or simply cannot work 24 hours a day due to difficult weather conditions.

And the reconnaissance tool from Lancet kamikaze drones, flying for only an hour, is very worthless.

Here I disagree with you. At its tactical level, in its range, flying for an entire hour (!), the NIMBLE "Lancet" is a very good aid for reconnaissance, and is also capable of attacking point targets such as an ATGM crew (which is unlikely to be able to detect a UAV with a longer range). Even ordinary civilian quadcopters, capable of "peeping from around the corner," have proven their effectiveness on the battlefield.

[DO]

I agree about this particular "Lancet". But I do not see any obstacles to turn it into a reusable return type of Hero.

Here and now, for the needs of the NWO, the following are relevant:
- production of Lancets (those that exist today) and their infrastructure in the required quantity;
- development of the most effective methods for the delivery and use of existing Lancets, primarily for counter-battery combat against the existing and predicted artillery of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, taking into account the current and developing means of Russian intelligence, organize the introduction of these methods, and train personnel.

For counter-battery combat, special radars have been developed with computer systems capable of detecting an artillery shell flying in the air and, using its trajectory, quickly calculate the location of firing guns and provide data for destruction (own artillery or MLRS). This technique is especially good for work on towed artillery (such as M777), but not so much on armored self-propelled guns. Although if a large-caliber projectile "falls" in the immediate vicinity of it and if it does not destroy it, then it will disable the installation. But variants with "self-aiming" combat elements of MLRS missiles are also possible.

Oh sure. It is possible to cover the area where enemy artillery is located with a salvo of large-caliber barrels, a salvo of NURS MLRS, or corrected projectiles or missiles. And, of course, we must continue to do so.
However:
- if the enemy artillery has already managed to shoot back and leave, the mentioned volleys will plow the empty field;
- detection of the coordinates of the gun along the trajectory of its projectile has one fundamental drawback - the projectile will still arrive and can cause losses; classic reconnaissance UAVs can detect enemy artillery while still on the march, and Lancets can hit moving targets.
Therefore, the introduction of reconnaissance drones, as well as the development and implementation of effective methods for delivering and using existing Lancets as a means of counter-battery combat, have a right to exist. I do not pretend, of course, to be a panacea.

At its tactical level, within its radius of action, flying for an hour (!) Nimble "Lancet" is a very good tool for reconnaissance, and even capable of attacking point targets such as ATGM crew

Although this is the second priority in the NWO, all kinds of javelins are abundantly supplied by the West to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Therefore, there is no doubt the relevance of such a "near" field of application of kamikaze drones. For which, probably, efforts to purchase returnable kamikaze drones anywhere are expedient, and at the same time we need to develop our own.
In the event that domestic factories are unable to produce the required number of Lancets within the required time frame, it would not be superfluous to purchase analogues of Lancets abroad.

[musketon64]

Quote: DO

Here and now, for the needs of the NWO, the following are relevant:
- production of Lancets (those that exist today) and their infrastructure in the required quantity;
- development of the most effective methods for the delivery and use of existing Lancets, primarily for counter-battery combat against the existing and predicted artillery of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, taking into account the current and developing means of Russian intelligence, organize the introduction of these methods, and train personnel.

Today, it is the "self-delivery" of drones (of those that exist) to the patrol area that is relevant. The development and implementation of other means of delivery will also take some time. And it is not a fact that they will be effective. Like the same patrolling jet aircraft that control patrolling munitions. It will simply be faster and more effective to launch a missile. Isn't it simpler, cheaper and safer to control them directly from the ground?

- if the enemy artillery has already managed to shoot back and leave, the mentioned volleys will plow the empty field;

And this is possible. The key word is "if". The sports rule is already in effect here - who is faster. And this already depends very much on the professionalism and luck (and in war this factor works all the time) of the opponents. I remember a few weeks before the start of the SVO there was a video on YouTube, how the first Ukrainian "Bayraktar" received from the Turks hit a D-30 NM LNR cannon with a missile. The crew scattered, and the cannon, apparently, was not badly damaged. But if a howitzer shell had exploded 10 meters from them, the consequences would have been different.

- detection of the coordinates of the gun along the trajectory of its projectile has one fundamental drawback - the projectile will still arrive and can cause losses; classic reconnaissance UAVs can detect enemy artillery even on the march.

That's right. But even in this case, the shells and missiles will fly faster and further than the small kamikaze drones. The Israelis have the long-range and long-flying Harop. But to destroy an artillery battery, you need several of them at once, loitering nearby. And then, these planes, judging by the photo, are larger in size, which makes them vulnerable to air defense covering the columns.
Therefore, I do not understand the point of using kamikaze drones in counter-battery combat, which have restrictions on long range, time of day and weather conditions.

[DO]

Today, it is the "self-delivery" of drones (of those that exist) to the loitering area that is relevant.

The advantage of self-delivery drones is its simplicity.
The disadvantage is the low speed of the drone, hence the long delivery time. If long-range enemy artillery was detected by sound or seismic, during the flight of a kamikaze drone, this artillery will travel so far from the point of work that the drone is unlikely to find it in the 10-20 minutes that it has left to fly. Repeaters for "self-delivery" are still needed. Therefore, wouldn’t it be more reliable to first send a reconnaissance drone or a pair that will scour the whole day, having the best camera, including a thermal locomotive?

Yes, just launching a rocket will be faster and more efficient. Isn't it easier and cheaper and safer to control them directly from the ground?

Of course, the main delivery method for kamikaze drones should be MLRS shells. But I do not know if this is possible for today's Lancets.
What to do if on a given sector of the front, where the enemy artillery worked, there is no own artillery for counter-battery work, there are no discussed drones? Recall the shelling of Donetsk.
The plane remains - either a classic attack plane (which the enemy’s air defense is looking forward to), or a pair of planes, one of which will deliver scouts and hang repeaters, and the other, after detecting a target, will deliver kamikaze drones. After all, you can’t deliver counter-battery artillery by plane. Of course, the aircraft must avoid the enemy's air defense zone.
And of course, the main way to control drones should be ground control points, through repeater drones.
As for controlling drones from the air, I simply remembered the video of the operation of our helicopters from afar with a canopy that will most likely fall into an open field. If these were short-range kamikaze drones fired from a helicopter without any relays, this action would probably be much more effective.

I don’t understand the point of using kamikaze drones in counter-battery combat, which have restrictions on long range, time of day and weather conditions.

There is only one meaning - a kamikaze drone is able to work on targets moving on the ground, as well as to search for them to a limited extent (compared to a reconnaissance drone). Arta can't. Other drones have shortcomings that can be systematically compensated and reduced. Nothing is perfect in nature. Kamikaze drones can become another tool of counter-battery combat that is relevant today, effective in capable hands.

[DO]

PS

Of course, the main delivery method for kamikaze drones should be MLRS shells. But I don't know if that's possible with today's Lancets."

Clearly, the splayed wings of today's Lancets don't fold down to fit the drone into the MLRS launch tube.
Therefore, it remains to drop today's Lancet from an aircraft at high altitude and speed, with the engine running. Planning bombs are dropped in the same way.

[musketon64]

Quote: DO

The plane remains - either a classic attack plane (which the enemy’s air defense is looking forward to), or a pair of planes, one of which will deliver scouts and hang repeaters, and the other, after detecting a target, will deliver kamikaze drones.

Quote: DO

Therefore, it remains to drop today's Lancet from an aircraft at high altitude and speed, with the engine running. Planning bombs are dropped in the same way.

That is, "Lancets" need to be modified for suspension to aircraft bomb racks?

And of course, the main way to control drones should be ground control points, through repeater drones.

That is, after dropping light UAVs, the aircraft turns away and goes to the base, and the control of this "swarm" should somehow quickly switch to ground control points through repeaters? Or should these P/Cs connect to these drones from a distance while the plane is still on its way to the drop point? Isn't it a very intricate scheme?

Therefore, wouldn’t it be more reliable to first send a reconnaissance drone or a pair that will scour the whole day, having the best camera, including a thermal locomotive?

But not all reconnaissance aircraft are the same. Medium reconnaissance aircraft carry advanced equipment and have a longer time in the air. But they also have corresponding dimensions, which complicates their work in conditions of strong enemy air defense (remember the "bayraktaropad" in the current SVO). Therefore, they will be forced to stay away from the front line. Small, nimble drones can fly over the heads of the enemy, between trees and hills, fly behind the back walls of buildings. That is, they can perform maneuvers that their larger counterparts cannot. And also, let's say, a long-range drone in night conditions detected an enemy target with its thermal imagers and transmitted the image to the P/U. But the "Lancet" does not have a night camera mode and therefore it is simply not possible to send it on a "mission".

As for controlling drones from the air, I simply remembered the video of the operation of our helicopters from afar with a canopy that will most likely fall into an open field. If these were short-range kamikaze drones fired from a helicopter without any relays, this action would probably be much more effective.

Helicopter pilots made such maneuvers not from a good life, but in order not to expose themselves to enemy air defense and worked on an area target with cheap NURSs. I already wrote about this above, that it is similar to control low-speed drones from an aircraft of death. Then it’s better to work with faster UR "Attack" or "Whirlwind" with laser guidance. Better yet, LN by the reflected laser beam, when the aircraft drops missiles or bombs and leaves, and the target is illuminated through a reconnaissance drone. At the very least, the chances are higher to shoot back quickly and leave the dangerous area.

[DO]

That is, "Lancets" need to be modified for suspension to aircraft bomb racks?

Unlike the delivery of MLRS, delivery by plane requires relatively little modification of the Lancet (if it has not already been done or prepared, since such delivery is obvious).
By the way, they write about the problems with the alleged supply of Iranian drones, due to the actions of Israel. Therefore, the rapid delivery of drones, the number of which is not enough to saturate the extended NWO front, is becoming increasingly relevant. This applies not only to kamikaze, but also to reconnaissance drones.

That is, after dropping light UAVs, the aircraft turns away and goes to the base, and the control of this "swarm" should somehow quickly switch to ground control points through repeaters? Or should these P/Cs connect to these drones from a distance while the plane is still on its way to the drop point? Isn't it a very intricate scheme?

It's up to the developers to decide. Personally, I like the simpler and more reliable second option, with connecting the drones to ground control before they are reset, as soon as the communication channel is established.

Medium scouts carry advanced equipment and have an increased time spent in the air. But also the corresponding dimensions, which complicates their work in conditions of strong enemy air defense (recall the "bayraktarofall" in the current NMD). Therefore, they will be forced to stay away from the front line.

Today it makes sense to talk about a specific SVO. The Armed Forces of Ukraine today do not have a strong layered air defense system.
If we talk about possible future conflicts, then not here, and at least not to me, but to people who are sufficiently informed about possible scenarios.

For example, a distant drone at night detected an enemy target with its thermal imagers and transmitted the image to the P / U. But the "Lancet" does not have a night camera mode and therefore there is simply no way to send it on a "mission".

In this case, it remains to work classically - artillery under the control of a reconnaissance aircraft, or strike aircraft. If both are unavailable, and there are only kamikaze drones, the scout must hold the target until dawn, when the kamikaze "open their eyes". It is clear that if a scout runs out of fuel, a replacement should fly to him.

I already wrote about this above, that it is similar to control low-speed drones from an aircraft of death. Then it’s better to work with faster UR "Attack" or "Whirlwind" with laser guidance. Better yet, LN by the reflected laser beam, when the aircraft drops missiles or bombs and leaves, and the target is illuminated through a reconnaissance drone. At the very least, the chances are higher to shoot back quickly and leave the dangerous area.

Logical.

[musketon64]

Quote: DO

By the way, they write about the problems with the alleged supply of Iranian drones, due to the actions of Israel.

I wonder how Israel can influence Iran? I can still understand if the US bans the supply of drones to Israel. But what would someone point out to Iran.....?!

Personally, I like the simpler and more reliable second option, with connecting the drones to ground control before they are reset, as soon as the communication channel is established.

If you are so reliant on using aviation for rapid delivery of drones, how about this option: helicopters deliver drones to the required area, launch them and land on the ground so as not to "glow" in the air, and then use them as ground control? Or, if you insist on rapid deployment, then simply deliver a multi-charge container with small drones to the same area, and then ground operators work with them. And do not bother with complex interaction schemes in the air. Which have not yet been developed and tested. If it makes sense to talk about a specific SVO. Probably, a drone return system using a catching net is still easier to develop. I am surprised that the "Lancets" do not have such an option.

[DO]

I wonder how Israel can influence Iran?"

They write that Israel bombed the assembly shop and warehouse of Iranian drones. Maybe it's fake, I don't know. Google yourself.

how do you like this option: helicopters deliver drones to the desired area, launch them and land on the ground so as not to "glow" in the air, and then they are used as a ground P / C?

viable option. Only it is logical to call such delivery not "fast", but "long".

And do not fool with complex schemes of interaction in the air.

Repeater drones are designed to establish a communication channel at the distance of long-range artillery, plus the removal of the control center from the front line to a safe distance.

[DO]

how do you like this option: helicopters deliver drones to the desired area, launch them and land on the ground so as not to "glow" in the air, and then they are used as a ground P / C?

To transport the recon drone back to the base after completing the mission, you need a helicopter. Moreover, your idea with PU and helicopter transport in one bottle fits here. However, this is unlikely to be without some problems. For example, Mi-24 fenders are too short for hanging one Outpost on each side of the helicopter (one reconnaissance, another repeater).
For a quick one-way delivery of Lancets, any tactical jet will do.

[DO]

If both are unavailable, and there are only kamikaze drones, the scout must hold the target until dawn, when the kamikaze "open their eyes". "

There is another option - "blindly" bring the kamikaze drone to the coordinates of the reconnaissance, and then use the laser guidance of the reconnaissance. Such a kamikaze drone can have a truncated package - a day camera, it does not need a broadband surveillance channel. Naturally, the probability of hitting the target in this case will be less than that of a fully functional "daytime" kamikaze drone. But the cost of the drone is also lower, and the narrow-band control infrastructure is simpler.

[musketon64]

Quote: DO

There is another option - "blindly" bring the kamikaze drone to the coordinates of the reconnaissance, and then use the laser guidance of the reconnaissance. Such a kamikaze drone can have a truncated package - a day camera, it does not need a broadband surveillance channel.

I do not understand something. And how will the kamikaze drone see the reconnaissance laser beam? Camera optics or what? Then everyone will see such a ray in the night. And especially those who shine. Or should the drone additionally have a sensor connected to the reconnaissance laser pointer, similar to those installed on the UR with LN?

[DO]

Or the drone should additionally have a sensor connected to the reconnaissance laser pointer, similar to those installed on the SD with LN

Of course, the standard version of laser guidance. It is also, of course, detectable, and this is an additional standard vulnerability of the scout.

[musketon64]

From the article:

Three systems are used for guidance: coordinate, with the help of optoelectronic means and combined

Nothing is known about the presence of LSN in the Lancet.

[DO]

"Nothing is known about the presence of LSN in the Lancet."

If the Lancet does not have standard laser guidance, a scout from a sufficient height can transmit the image of an incoming kamikaze drone, cutting circles against the background of the target, to the display of his operator, and another operator of a "blind" kamikaze drone sitting nearby (or having a copy of the image on his display), control the kamikaze by looking at the display so as to hit the target. Pretentious and uncomfortable, but how else ... Or nothing :)))

[musketon64]

Quote: DO

Pretentious and inconvenient, but how else ...

Not that word.....
Even for one drone. And to destroy an artillery battery, you need at least a dozen of them, and how to manage such a swarm? Dozens of operators looking into one tablet!?

[DO]

Not that word

I agree.
This is actually a question for a drone developer.
If you use today's Lancets as they are, then work with artillery on a dark night, or wait for kamikaza until the roosters.

[musketon64]

Quote: DO

classic reconnaissance UAVs can detect enemy artillery even on the march.

But it’s interesting, to what depth will Bayraktar be able to view the territory, flying at a respectful distance, out of reach of at least medium-range air defense, with low clouds and some other light drizzle?

[DO]

to what depth will Bayraktar be able to view the territory flying at a respectful distance out of reach of at least medium-range air defense, with low clouds and some other light drizzle?

Well, it's like a threat to a big guy - "if I found you drunk and tied, I would show you!" :)))
But seriously, if our troops in the same Mariupol, and not only, were saturated with analogues of Bayraktars, the issue could be resolved faster and with fewer losses.

[Ablet]

For ZALA AERO products, operators of reconnaissance drones (for example, 421-16E2) and kamikaze drones are part of the same combat crew. Usually, they move to the drone launch site in a Gazelle or other van (there is a video on the Internet). What prevents this combat crew from landing in a small plane, for example, an An-2 or L-410? Drones can be hung under its wings or fuselage. It is much easier for them (ZALA AERO) to do this than to try to adapt lancets and reconnaissance drones to combat aircraft/helicopters or MLRS. There, numerous approvals from the Aerospace Forces, etc., etc. will be required. In addition, the An-2 can circle for 5 hours over our rear 10-15 km from the line of combat contact, and this will cost pennies compared to the flight of the Su-25. It is also unlikely that it will be possible to hang lancets under the Orions, because ZALA AERO and Kronstadt are competitors and it is definitely NOT profitable for the former.
The use of an aircraft as a launch and control site for drones will enable faster and more powerful versions of lancets and cubes, and faster scout drones with longer flight times. This will also make it possible to increase the radius of use of all controlled UAVs up to 100 km.

[DO]

For ZALA AERO products, operators of reconnaissance drones (for example, 421-16E2) and kamikaze drones are part of the same combat crew.

Controls ready here and now, common to scouts and kamikazes of the same manufacturer, are certainly a plus.
However, when choosing a reconnaissance, it is necessary to take into account a complex of its other characteristics - dimensions and weight, flight time, speed and altitude, composition of reconnaissance equipment, communications and relaying equipment, and most importantly, the number of reconnaissance drones available for use, here and now.
Such a choice should be made by specialists who have all the necessary information. In addition, today one scout may be optimal, and tomorrow another.

What prevents this combat crew from landing in a small aircraft, for example, An-2 or L-410? Drones, respectively, hang under its wings or fuselage. It is much easier for them (ZALA AERO) to do this than trying to adapt lancets and reconnaissance drones to combat aircraft / helicopters or MLRS. It will require numerous approvals from the HQS

If a scout can search for a target for 12-16 hours and preferably 24 hours, then hanging in the air for operators, even at a distance from the front line, is both undesirable from a security point of view (they can be seen on radars), and technically impossible (because neither Cornflowers nor helicopters / planes cannot hang so much).
In addition, where to go to the scouts who flew off their fuel? They cannot hitch back to the plane; to transport them to the base by plane, at least some kind of runway is needed.
Personally, it seems to me that the idea of ​​\u64b\uXNUMXbcomrade "Mushketon-XNUMX" with PU helicopters that launched reconnaissance aircraft from the air, landed on a patch and controlled from the ground through a repeater, and then transported spent reconnaissance aircraft to the base, seems to me to be a working one.
The rapid delivery of kamikaze by MLRS missiles, including from the air, is, of course, the future, and not the current day.
As for the "numerous agreements with the Aerospace Forces", it seems to me personally that, if the command of the NMD wishes, organizational measures and regulations can be quickly developed and implemented, in contrast to the long-term establishment of the mass production of drones by the industry and the saturation of the troops with them, under severe sanctions.
Delivering by Kukuruzniks to the launch point of kamikaze drones is a completely working option, especially for short distances. For longer distances, a jet is preferable because it will fly to the delivery point from a large drone base/depot faster, and release kamikazes from high altitude and speed, away from the enemy's air defense zone.

Hanging lancets under Orions is also unlikely to succeed, because. ZALA AERO and Kronstadt are competitors and it is definitely NOT profitable for the first.

I consider the idea of ​​arming a heavy drone, Orion or Altius, with kamikazes (to destroy both ground and air targets) promising.
And to compensate for the natural competition of manufacturers, there is a state customer. Who orders the music, he dances the girls :)))

[Ablet]

Coordination with any second office is always time and someone else's interests. But to buy L-410 or An-2 on the secondary market, and then wash, paint and sell it to the customer (Russian Defense Ministry) as part of a complex at a triple price is a matter of several weeks and one own pocket, and the interests of the company (ZALA AERO is included in Kalashnikov) first of all. "Kronstadt" with Orions, in principle, will not work here, besides, you will have to bind and open control interfaces and this is time, time and again time and secrets that no one wants to share.
The departing reconnaissance aircraft will, as before, descend by parachute to a point via GLONASS in our rear, where a couple of soldiers in a Gazelle will be waiting for them.
As for reconnaissance 12-16 hours by other UAVs (Orion, outpost, etc.). Units with the ZALA AERO complex, having received external target designation, first send their own reconnaissance aircraft to confirm the target and conduct additional reconnaissance, and only then send a lancet or cube.
There is another important point. In recent weeks, our heavy reconnaissance drones have not flown behind enemy lines, as the probability of their destruction is very high, and their optics allow monitoring a maximum of 20 km of rear depth. ZALA's own scouts are much smaller than outposts and orions and do not leave a thermal footprint (because they are powered by electric motors), they operate at an altitude of up to 5000m and can fly into the rear of the enemy up to 70km with a much lower risk of loss.
Another point: reinforced lancets launched from an air carrier will be able to fly at a speed of 250-300 km/h to a depth of 70 km with a 5-7 kg warhead, which will allow hunting for Hymers and other NATO scum.

[DO]

Coordination with any other office always means time and someone else's interests. ...
bind and open control interfaces and this is time, time and again time and secrets that no one wants to share.

The factor of unwillingness of developers to share secrets, as a former developer, including for MO, I completely understand. However, this applies to copyrights for initiative developments for their own money, primarily for a citizen, protected by law.
However, if this is a government order, the owner of all secrets is the government. I understand that to resolve such issues, the ordering government agency must have people with the appropriate qualifications, and the main thing is the desire of the management to work effectively in the interests of the same SVO, and not stupidly write papers, move them from place to place and polish formal financial reporting.

The reconnaissance officers who departed will, as before, parachute down to a GLONASS point in our rear, where a couple of soldiers on a Gazelle will be waiting for them.

The solutions discussed make sense only in the context of the lack of drones, and their prompt delivery, primarily for the priority purposes of counter-battery combat.
Delivery by Gazelle means that the troops have already been saturated with drones, when the need for delivery by aircraft will disappear. But this does not apply to today.
==
The choice of a specific reconnaissance model should probably be carried out outside of an open chat, by a team of well-informed specialists.

[DO]

PS
As for the battery "own ZALA scouts", or their analogues.
PU helicopters operating from the ground also need cover themselves. Which can be carried out by an attack helicopter (or two) "parked" nearby and constantly ready to take off, whose "eyes" are small-sized battery reconnaissance drones.

[svd-xnumx]

The range of destruction, taking into account the flight time of 1 hour, probably reaches at least 80 km.

Not a fact, there is still a factor of communication with the operator.

[TreeSmall]

The range of destruction, taking into account the flight time of 1 hour, probably reaches at least 80 km.

No. Only with the coordinate guidance method such a range is possible.
But accuracy will suffer
The rest: with the help of optoelectronic means and the combined radio horizon will not work.
The CPSU, as far as I know, we do not have for them

[rotmistr60]

Then first the lancet is a piercing-cutting tool with a double-edged blade.

Today, Konashenkov announced that on July 16, the Russian Aerospace Forces killed over 600 Ukrainian fighters, including 120 foreign mercenaries, as a result of a strike in the village of Konstantinovka, Odessa region. It is strange why only today the statement was made?

[neworange88]

Only today we learned the results of the blow, most likely.

[Penzyak]

How can you tell if there is minced meat and dumplings?

[neworange88]

Quote: Penzyak

How can you tell if there is minced meat and dumplings?

Well, somehow this figure was calculated in Ukraine, judging by everything. At least approximately.

[Hey]

How can you find out if there is minced meat and dumplings.

Elementary. The construction of HP is carried out, then verification. Headquarters data. Intelligence to us with a report.

[Penzyak]

Was there someone to build a superfluous squad and even found lists?

[Thrifty]

Well, firstly, they are needed en masse in the troops. And, their primary task is to knock out equipment, and at the same time the manpower of the adversary.

[An K-s]

Alcohol is still alcohol cucumber.

[nnm]

Yes, it is important not that they started, but that it would be massive, systemic, and not launch a couple of ammunition, report, and then again the old fashioned way ...
It is archival to saturate the troops with modern weapons as soon as possible: UAVs, tanks, aircraft, electronic warfare, artillery, etc.
And then you read the news - Lancet, Cube, BMPT, AK12, etc.
You watch videos of ordinary fighters - so almost everyone fights even without collimators ...

[nnm]

In my opinion, quite recently there was already an article on VO about this product.
And about the application - well, the same thing as with the Lancet - consistency, mass character, saturation of the troops with various latest weapons, products ...
These are not sporoidal episodes, but everyday life

[Zadok]

what kind of connection is this, that it gives a picture to the operator for 40 km? mind you, I'm not a spy)) 40 km from the tower in the villages, even the first channel was not caught (in the USSR).

[v1tz]

5 kg of load is very good, but I would like to hear about more serious devices and they, apparently, are needed.

[svd-xnumx]

hear about more serious devices

Iskander is often not enough to destroy bridges and tunnels. It is necessary to attach a non-nuclear warhead to the Topol, 1200 kg for the maximum range, the weight to be thrown can be increased, I think, when working at a shorter distance.

[v1tz]

Yes, excellent recycling of old rockets ...

[Two]

What a fun toy! More reward points for her!

[Igor Borisov_2]

Touches the phrase - increased power They would also write - increased mighty ....

[Anatole Klim]

Quote: Igor Borisov_2

The phrase "increased power" is touching. They should have also written "increased power"...

The power of ammunition is the official term used in the army and among designers and developers.
The power of ammunition is an indicator of the effectiveness of its action on the target. For example, the power of high-explosive projectiles is determined by the area of ​​the destruction zone; armor-piercing - the thickness of the pierced armor at a given angle of impact; fragmentation - the area of ​​​​the reduced zone of fragmentation, determined by the number, mass and speed of expansion of the fragments; for all projectiles - the probability of hitting the target.

[Pivot]

In your case, it is better to remain silent, maybe you will pass for a smart one.

[Vladimir 290]

Dear Igor, "increased power" is the official name in the military-technical documentation and in the orders of the Ministry of Defense. This is how they are characterized, incl. new explosives, so everything is just written technically correctly. I didn’t give you a minus, for a person who does not encounter such terms, such a phrase may really seem strange.

[Igor Borisov_2]

Thanks for the clarification, I didn't know

[igork735]

It seems to me that there are problems in the Moscow Region, including with the Russian language.

[Fisherman]

The lancet has actually been used since the time of Gostomel. The dills posted a couple of pictures of the fallen Lancets, apparently electronic warfare ... ours most likely worked out the control system and now you won’t find photos of the Lancets near the dills - everyone will surely strike the enemy! There would be more such systems for searching and destroying American and other long-range systems!

[Vladimir 290]

I wonder if there is self-destruction in the event of such a fall

[Fisherman]

judging by a couple of pictures - it was not during the Kyiv operation.

[Mavrikiy]

A new version of the loitering ammunition "Lancet" began to be used during the NWO in Ukraine

When the a new version of the loitering ammunition "Lancet" will start massively apply during the JWO in Ukraine

[Roust]

Is it tweezers, is it a lancet, or even with a sledgehammer on a Nazi head in a saucepan, most importantly, send the patient to the morgue.

[Mavrikiy]

new "Lancet" can be in the air up to one hour,

It won't be enough. There should be an organization of Lancet batteries of 4-5 pieces, so that at least 1 device, 24x7, patrols in the air. and organize a "hunt" for American MLRS. Helicopter control may be required.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Mavrikiy

It won't be enough. There should be an organization of Lancet batteries of 4-5 pieces, so that at least 1 device, 24x7, patrols in the air. and organize a "hunt" for American MLRS.

With a combat radius of 40 km and a speed of about 100 km / h, it is possible to work without barrage - from the position "on duty on the ground." The main thing is that reconnaissance UAVs detect and accompany targets in time.

[Mavrikiy]

"Loitering" for 1 hour - there is chatter and cheap advertising. 24 hours - that's a barrage, though there, solid carbon fiber and a wingspan, well, the price .... Well, no idle talk is required there.

[air wolf]

To destroy the self-propelled guns in the Lancet position, the most important thing is when the videos show that it works reliably, damn it, there would be more Lancets in the Donbass!

[Aist_M]

Who will explain why the wing is X-shaped? This is not a guided bomb, but a plane. For an airplane, this is the worst wing you can think of.

[Modya]

Combat unit of increased power

is this a typo according to Freud, or a new parameter for evaluating the characteristics of military equipment?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Modya

is this a typo according to Freud, or a new parameter for evaluating the characteristics of military equipment?

The power of ammunition
The ability of shells, warheads of missiles, aerial bombs, mines and other ammunition in nuclear and conventional weapons to cause damage of the required level to the target (target); characterizes their action at the target.

© Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

[Skipper]

The lancet reminds me of someone ..... specifically an aardvark ... he is also a ground pig

[Ablet]

Good decision. And what about a reusable kamikaze drone, or rather not quite a kamikaze? Put a slightly lighter drop warhead on the lancet, and perhaps add an extra battery to make it enough to go back. Well, you still need to add a parachute to the Lancet for landing.
Drone Zala 421-16 found the target, launched Lancet, it flew in, dropped the bomb and flew back to the operator. There they changed the battery, hung a new bomb and went back to battle.
The radius of action is likely to be somewhat reduced, but less important targets can be hit.

[senima56]

"... the kamikaze drone has an increased flight duration and a large mass of the warhead ...." Now that's the point! More than 5 kg of explosives and an hour of flight is the topic!

[usm5]

To combat long-range artillery, the range is too small. We still need to come up with a carrier with which such a drone can be thrown into the rear of the enemy.

[Gorygor]

Article maximum 2-3 sentences. Repeated the same thing over and over