And how will we shoot down the UAV

63
And how will we shoot down the UAV

In military conflicts of recent years, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and loitering ammunition of various sizes have become widespread: from small-sized UAVs used for surveillance and homemade kamikaze UAVs with grenades to large-sized UAVs with optoelectronic systems and strike weapons.

In this regard, the task arose of developing special means of combating them, since the existing air defense systems (air defense) were not able to cope with the massive raids of such UAVs. Also, the need to develop specialized tools was also influenced by the economic side of missile interception of UAVs by existing air defense systems, namely, the fact that the cost of a modern anti-aircraft guided missile (SAM) is many times higher than the cost of the intercepted UAV itself.



Of course, expensive missiles of medium and long-range army and military air defense systems can also be used for such purposes, but their production is quite expensive and complicated, which is simply not permissible in a protracted military conflict.

Possibilities for solving this problem


The solution of this problem must begin with an analysis of the intended goals. These are all kinds of UAVs with a maximum flight altitude of up to 6 kilometers, a distinctive feature of which, compared with a missile weapons is a low airspeed (maximum 70 m/s) and a generally straight flight path.

The main targets for the missile under development can also include unguided and corrected projectiles of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) in the final phase of the flight. Despite the relatively high flight speed of MLRS projectiles, their trajectory is close to ballistic, therefore it is easily calculated by modern systems, which makes them a fairly simple target.

From the analysis of the targets, we can conclude that there is no need for a high average speed of the missile, during the flight the missile will not perform maneuvers with high overloads, the maximum range and height of destruction of this missile should not exceed 10 and 6 kilometers, respectively.

Also, when developing a rocket, it is necessary to reduce its cost as much as possible, and, consequently, to simplify it, as a result of which all complex and expensive means of guiding the rocket must be placed on the launcher. Due to the fact that the maximum range of the rocket will not exceed 10 kilometers, it will always be in the visibility zone of the radar station (RLS) of the launcher, therefore, you can use the radio command guidance method, as the simplest and cheapest, in terms of equipment placed on the rocket .

It should also be guided by the fact that in order to repel a massive raid on one launcher, a large amount of SAM data should be placed, and in view of the fact that the SAM being developed will be part of an existing complex, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of installing mixed ammunition from existing and developed missiles with the installation of a new small-sized missile in a regular place of a larger one with minimal modifications to the launcher.

As a result of these measures, the rocket should be a small-caliber body with a warhead (warhead), a propulsion system (DU), a simple steering gear, an explosive mechanism and radio equipment necessary to receive control commands from the launcher.

The result of solving this problem


The main domestic air defense systems designed to fight UAVs are Pantsir-S and Tor in their various modifications.

If we compare these complexes in terms of which of them the developed missile will turn out to be simpler and cheaper, then the "Pantsir" is the most preferable, since in this complex the missiles have an inclined launch directly in the direction of the target, in contrast to the vertical launch on " Torah. And despite the fact that a vertical launch allows you to fire targets at 360 degrees, and an inclined one - only in sectors, the main disadvantage of a vertical launch is the need to implement a missile inclination system towards the target after the missile exits the transport and launch container (TLC), which in turn the queue complicates and increases the cost of the rocket.

Therefore, it is not surprising that it was the developer of the Pantsir-S complex - JSC Design Bureau of Instrument Engineering named after A.I. Academician A. G. Shipunov "at the Army 2022 forum presented a small-sized missile with the 19Y6 index (according to media reports), which is part of the Pantsir-SM complex. A photo of the rocket is presented below.


Small-sized rocket for the Pantsir-SM complex

Analysis of the appearance of the rocket


According to a representative of KBP JSC, the presented missile has the following characteristics:

• maximum range of destruction, m: about 7;
• maximum height of defeat, m: about 5;
• maximum caliber, mm: 80;
• length, mm: about 2;
• rocket mass, kg: about 18;
• mass of warhead with structural elements, kg: about 6;
• warhead type: fragmentation rod;
• maximum speed, m/s: about 800.


If you look at the presented sample, shown in photo 1, you can see the rocket compartments delimited by colors: the head part is highlighted in brown, then behind it is a steering unit with 4 rudders, next, most likely, is a control equipment unit, then highlighted in yellow the warhead of the rocket, and at the end, the propulsion system of the rocket with a nozzle block and fixed stabilizers mounted on top of it is highlighted in black. The rocket is made according to the canard aerodynamic scheme, which is absolutely justified, since this scheme provides high efficiency of the rudders and a small effect on the controllability of the displacement of the center of mass in the process of fuel burnout, and the indicated aerodynamic scheme is quite simple to implement.

Aerodynamic surfaces are represented by two pairs of full-turn rudders and two pairs of fixed stabilizers. The aerodynamic surfaces are installed according to the “plus” - x (+ - x) scheme, while all of them are folding, for compact placement of the rocket in the TPK, and are laid out with the help of torsion bars immediately after the rocket takes off from the TPK. Also, if you look at the block of stabilizers (photo 2), you can see that the stabilizers are maximally shifted to the bottom cut, while a part of each stabilizer is cut off at an angle to the axis of the rocket, this is done to exclude shading by the products of combustion of the remote control. This arrangement of stabilizers is probably used to shift the focus of the rocket as close to its bottom cut as possible.


Rocket stabilizer block 19Ya6

The body of the rocket, which, according to the representative of JSC KBP, has a caliber of 80 millimeters, has a large elongation: about 25. You can also notice that the head part and the steering gear compartment located behind it have a slightly smaller caliber compared to the main part of the rocket, about 65 millimeters, the pairing of this difference in calibers is made using a truncated cone. The head fairing of the rocket is made in the form of a truncated cone with an elongation of the order of 3, further it will be considered why the bluntness was made in its nose. Why the narrowing of the rocket after the head part was made is difficult to say, most likely, this was done for some aerodynamic reasons.

Most likely, the rocket body and aerodynamic surfaces are made of aluminum, and the nose fairing is made of composite material.

Bodies and control equipment of the rocket


As noted at the beginning of the article, for the greatest reduction in the cost of the rocket, it is necessary to simplify the onboard control and guidance system as much as possible. So did the designers of JSC "KBP". The missile uses a radio command guidance system, which allows you to abandon the homing heads, since the measurement of target parameters and the development of control commands are carried out on the launcher, and then they are transmitted to the missile via a radio channel. Most likely, to guide this missile, by analogy with the 57E6 missile, the half-straightening method is used [1]. It is quite possible that the 3-point method was abandoned, since neither a laser nor an optical transponder could be found on the rocket.

The missile's control system appears to be 3-channel, with one channel per pitch, heading or yaw and roll angle. Due to the fact that the stabilizers are installed parallel to the axis of the rocket, it can be concluded that the rocket, like the 57E6, is stabilized in roll. The only important element of the control system that cannot be transferred to the launcher is the onboard gyroscope, which determines the angular position of the missile by double integrating the angular acceleration of the missile along the roll. Each pair of rudders is responsible for its own angle, while, most likely, one pair of rudders can only deviate in-phase and can only be responsible for control either in pitch angle or in course angle, and the second pair of rudders must deviate both in-phase and differentially to control along one of the direction angles and the roll angle.

The control equipment converts all incoming commands into an electrical signal, which is transmitted to the steering gear. The simplest and cheapest steering gear is the air-dynamic drive, in which the working fluid is the air flow on the rocket, which is taken through special holes in the head. Such a hole can be seen on the rocket if you look at the end of the head.


Air intake port for dynamic air drive

Despite the poor quality of photo 3, it can be seen that the rocket nose fairing is empty, and in the depths we can distinguish the air intake of the steering gear with a grid installed on it, a similar grid can be seen on the air intake of the 9M115 rocket from the Metis anti-tank missile system (photo 4 ).


Air intake on a 9M115 rocket

This mesh protects the steering gear from foreign bodies getting into it. The only thing that is still unknown is the location of the antenna for receiving radio commands from the launcher.

It is difficult to say anything about the static stability of a rocket, which directly affects its controllability, since this requires a more detailed aerodynamic analysis.

Warhead


Behind the compartment of the steering drive of the onboard equipment is the compartment of the warhead. It has a length of about 360 millimeters. According to the declared characteristics, the mass of the warhead, together with structural elements, is 6 kilograms, the type of warhead is fragmentation-rod, which is a fairly reliable and easy-to-implement solution.

The warhead is initiated by a signal from an actuating-safety mechanism with two types of target sensor: contact and non-contact. It is difficult to say whether elements of the non-contact target sensor are present on board the missile or whether the non-contact detonation occurs on the command to detonate coming from the launcher. But if we assume that the non-contact target sensor is still installed on the missile, then the transmitting antennas are integrated into the body of the head conical fairing made of radio-transparent material, and the receiving antennas are most likely mounted on the body behind the steering gear.

Propulsion system


The last compartment in the design of the rocket is the control compartment with a nozzle block. Due to the short range of this missile, it uses a single-stage single-mode remote control with a single-nozzle block. The length of the control unit without a nozzle block is about 860 millimeters. The design of the fuel charge, apparently, is a piece of mixed solid fuel, firmly attached to the engine shell. The fuel cartridge itself probably has a star-shaped channel in the profile, since this type of charge allows, depending on the geometric parameters of the “star”, to obtain different geometric laws of charge combustion, and, consequently, different thrust profiles of the rocket engine. Also, the advantage of this type of charge is sufficient filling of the volume of the combustion chamber, which saves the volume of the combustion chamber, and, consequently, reduces the mass of the PS structure.

The ignition system of the engine is a single squib with an additional transfer charge. The ignition system is located, most likely, on the side of the warhead compartment, since it is structurally much simpler compared to its location on the side of the nozzle block.


Nozzle block rocket 19Ya6

The rocket nozzle block itself, shown in photo 5, has a diameter in the outlet section approximately equal to the rocket caliber, which makes it possible to reduce the bottom drag of the rocket. As can be seen in photo 5, the nozzle block is made of various materials, while the part closest to the exit section is possibly made of a composite material. Also in the nozzle block, you can observe the installed nozzle plug, it is necessary to seal the combustion chamber of the remote control during the storage of the rocket. However, it is difficult to say why the hole was made in this plug, and, perhaps, this is inherent only in the bench sample.

Also, 4 lugs are made above the outlet section of the nozzle to hold the opened stabilizers in a certain position.

Launcher integration



Pack of 4 TPK for 19Ya6 rocket

Since this missile was developed for the Pantsir-S complex in service, it was therefore necessary to develop such a design for attaching the TPK missile to the launcher, which would require minimal modifications to combat vehicles.

For this, a design was developed, shown in photo 6, it allows 4 TPKs of a new rocket to be placed in a package layout. Its main advantage is that it is installed in place of one TPK 57E6 missile, which allows you to assemble any quantitative combination of missiles of different types on one vehicle, depending on the expected combat situation. Most likely, the standard will be the 8 + 10 ammunition load, which will use 8 new small-sized missiles and 10 57E6 / 57E6M missiles, or the 16 + 8 ammunition load, which will use 16 new small-sized missiles and 8 57E6 / 57E6M missiles. It is unlikely that an ammunition load consisting entirely of new missiles will be used: yes, this will increase the number of missiles on one vehicle to 48 pieces, and on the transport combat vehicle being developed - up to 96 pieces, but this will leave the complex without a "long arm", which will make it quite vulnerable.

The following questions remain open: will the launcher be able to simultaneously direct missiles of different types to targets; and how many targets and how many missiles can simultaneously fire one complex. All this will directly affect how much the combat capabilities of the complex will grow.

Conclusions


What do we have in the end?

Specialists of KBP JSC have developed a fairly simple and cheap short-range anti-aircraft guided missile, the main targets for which will be UAVs, loitering and gliding ammunition and unguided projectiles of multiple launch rocket systems. Yes, this missile, according to the statements of the representative of KBP JSC, is capable of hitting airplanes, helicopters, tactical and cruise missiles, but objectively, these are not its targets.

The new missile will greatly increase the combat capabilities in terms of the number of missiles on board one Pantsir-S complex from one and a half to two times. And the integration into the complex of a promising transport combat vehicle, with a 2-fold increase in the ammunition load of missiles, relative to the base Pantsir-S, will make it possible to create a practical impenetrable dome over protected objects.

Most importantly, this missile will make it possible, from an economic point of view, to more reasonably use the means available in service, due to its use in situations where medium and long-range air defense systems were used to destroy small UAVs, and will help to minimize the ratio of the cost of missiles to goal cost.
63 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    21 February 2023 04: 55

    How much does one such device cost for the Shell?
    Compare with the cost of defeating the cheapest common UAV of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. what
    1. +4
      21 February 2023 07: 36
      ... the rocket will allow ... to use the means available in service more wisely ..

      —-Thanks to the author for the detailed technical analysis of the small-sized 19Ya6 short-range military missile (about 7 km range and 5 km in height)

      —- It is doubtful that 19Y6 is cheaper than a mass reconnaissance UAV of military combat (a modified commercial quadcopter, no more than $200). I estimate the cost of 19Y6 at least $1000.

      —- The statistics of the high-altitude-range practical characteristics of melee UAVs are unknown to me, but their dominant, main function is reconnaissance and fire adjustment. Judging by the published photos and videos from such drones, these are distances and heights in the range from hundreds of meters to several kilometers (100 - 3000 meters).

      —-Basic, unmodified "Shilka" ZSU-23-4 (served in the regimental air defense battery of SMEs, technician ORNR "Shilok"), with a range of up to 2 km and a height of up to 5 km - an ideal weapon for destroying the bulk of reconnaissance UAVs and adjustments. According to economic and technical indicators.

      —- As a result: 1. On deca-meter D and V - the anti-drone emitter, the gun and the Shilka are optimally used. 2. On hecta-meter and lower kilometer D and B - "Shilka". 3. On the upper kilometer D and B - "Shell", including the 19Y6 missile.
      1. +6
        21 February 2023 08: 46
        Estimate the cost of the target at least 3k , and not 0.2 at all. For 200 bucks, you can't even make a one-time fpv
        1. mz
          +13
          21 February 2023 11: 39
          In most cases, I believe, it is more correct to compare not the cost of a missile and the cost of an UAV that needs to be destroyed, but the cost of an UAV and the damage that it can cause. Then the rocket may turn out to be not very expensive.
          1. 0
            21 February 2023 16: 30
            Tula Design Bureau im. Shipunov
            Not that they didn’t come up with a new one, they took a simple proven Metiz and reduced it in size, a control system similar to it there via cable here on the radio, in fact, this is a radio-controlled airplane on a turbojet engine. Gas-dynamic rudders the principle of operation is one to one ATGM Metiz. With such success, it would be possible to stick a missile from MANPADS willow or needles into the container and implement radio control, radio command or homing. MANPADS are produced by our industry with a circulation of thousands of pieces, and releasing another thousand pieces is not a problem for you and unification by corps.
            The body of the SAM has a caliber of 80mm and a 65mm warhead. The MANPADS missile has a caliber of 70mm.
            1. +1
              22 February 2023 09: 01
              Well, there are no gas-dynamic rudders either in this rocket or in Metis. The conversion of a MANPADS missile into a missile with radio command control is comparable to the creation of a new missile, since only solid propellant rocket engines can be left from MANPADS, and warheads (due to their low power) and all control equipment require replacement.
          2. 0
            25 February 2023 10: 37
            This is the policy of the state! If the target of the drone is a trench with a soldier, this is one thing, and if a nuclear power plant is another!
      2. +2
        22 February 2023 00: 17
        Quote: Mikhail Drabkin
        The basic, unmodified "Shilka" ZSU-23-4 (served in the regimental air defense battery of the SME, technician ORNR "Shilok"), with a range of up to 2 km and a height of up to 5 km, is an ideal weapon for destroying the bulk of reconnaissance and adjustment UAVs.
        The target for Shilka is too small, she has a cloud of shells for the plane
      3. 0
        25 February 2023 10: 36
        Shilka doesn't throw stones either. What will be the cost?
      4. 0
        25 February 2023 11: 52
        Where have you seen a $200 quad flying at an altitude of 3000m? in a dream or something. Secondly, to counter such targets as a quadrocopter, the shell has guns, and missiles for larger and higher-altitude targets.
    2. +9
      21 February 2023 08: 59
      The price that any type of weapon costs our country, especially missiles, is a secret behind 107 seals. When you ask representatives of design bureaus and factories a question about the price, the tension rises to the limit.
      1. +3
        22 February 2023 13: 17
        For a range of more than 300 km, communication with the UAV is via satellites. So you need to shoot down a satellite.
        For the number of satellites is much less than the number of UAVs that use these satellites.
        For each technical means there is a corresponding technical countermeasure.
        This is the same as the use of tactical nuclear weapons .. It is used not out of nothing to do, but because in modern conditions it is impossible to covertly form a strike force to break through the defense.
        And the function of the "shock fist" is performed by only one camouflaged gun.

        Conclusion ; if the state cannot use the weapons that it has, it should not get involved in any conflict at all. There will be orgomnye victims, but tolku- zero.
        1. 0
          25 February 2023 10: 41
          How are you going to shoot down satellites that do not belong to Ukraine! Here the way out is very simple, you need to send all your experts and patriots like you to the war - regardless of your age! Just taking as a basis the fact that you simply, according to your choice of profession, are obliged to defend your homeland without wishing for life and blood!
      2. 0
        22 February 2023 15: 57
        Quote from missileexpert
        When you ask representatives of design bureaus and factories a question about the price, the tension rises to the limit.
        That's right: how do they know? Such a question should be asked to economists and high authorities. Everything is not so simple there: technical specifications are taken, cooperation is formed, the price of components is calculated, labor costs and overheads are taken from previous similar works, a feasibility study is written, and they go to the State Defense Order or PZ with it. And they say: "We justified it. We agree. But we don't have that much money, we'll give you less, do it."
    3. +1
      22 February 2023 13: 37
      In any case, it is many times (or dozens of times) cheaper than hitting shahedas / geraniums from pedriots / nasamses / irises, etc.
      I am interested in another question.
      Important objects (headquarters, warehouses, etc.), for example, they will cover. But what about the entire front line? After all, UAVs fly to the cutting edge 24/7/365. How to cover the entire cutting edge from them?
      1. 0
        23 February 2023 18: 45
        Judging by the information in the media, MANPADS are operating at the forefront, and these systems seem to cover the rear.
      2. +1
        24 February 2023 22: 38
        The main defense at the forefront is drone strikers. And small-sized electronic warfare, such as Volna, Burdock, etc.
    4. +1
      22 February 2023 14: 01
      Here you need to take into account the prevented damage. If the UAV breaks through to the object of impact, it can cause damage, which will cost much more than the cost of the UAV. If you shoot down the UAV before impact, then this damage will not happen. It will be prevented.
      1. +1
        24 February 2023 22: 44
        Not really. If the "blood from the nose" needs to hit some object, then they will simply overload the air defense and that's it! Actually, the losses of the Shells were associated with the depletion of ammunition. Therefore, the question of the economy is not idle, the cheaper the method of destruction, the more difficult it is to overload the air defense. And here rockets will already help. To combat cheap UAVs, anti-aircraft artillery systems with remote detonation projectiles are needed. There's nowhere cheaper. In short, Derivation needs to be brought to mind and that's it.
    5. +1
      22 February 2023 14: 10
      At the cost of ZR, the Pantsir is a record holder. There is no GOS.
      1. +1
        24 February 2023 22: 48
        Potential record holder - Derivation with programmable projectiles. There, both in range and in height, 57 caliber hits further than the rocket in the article. Well, it's cheaper than ever.
    6. 0
      25 February 2023 10: 33
      I think at least 5000000 rubles will be a piece
    7. 0
      1 March 2023 17: 57
      Lech from Android. (Lech from Android) Compare with the cost of defeating the cheapest common UAV of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
      It would be compared with the cost of the affected object by the cheapest common UAV of the Armed Forces of Ukraine ...
  2. +5
    21 February 2023 05: 13
    The fantasy of 1953 by R. Sheckley becomes a reality. "Guardian Birds".
    1. +3
      21 February 2023 05: 41
      Quote: parusnik
      The fantasy of 1953 by R. Sheckley becomes a reality. "Guardian birds

      Later, an anti-aircraft defense system against these missiles will be placed on board the UAV. And, as a result, a complex against an anti-air defense complex will be placed on anti-UAV missiles. And then... Etc. wink
      1. +3
        21 February 2023 06: 10
        Later, an anti-aircraft defense system against these missiles will be placed on board the UAV.
        Infinity has no limits.
  3. +8
    21 February 2023 06: 06
    A rocket, that's good. And how about a projectile with remote detonation? Or the same "Shilka 2.0". A cheap device must be shot down with a cheap device
    1. +5
      21 February 2023 07: 53
      It turns out that Cheetahs are not such useless junk, as a colleague of this author claimed?
      1. +2
        21 February 2023 09: 42
        If the shells are with a radio fuse, otherwise the effectiveness is weak.
    2. 0
      21 February 2023 09: 32
      I also understand to develop, let's say, a 125 mm shrapnel projectile for a tank with a bunch of balls and remote detonation as directed by a laser rangefinder ...
      But in 23 mm fragments, to hell and not to hell, even if you manage to insert this fuse into 23 and even 30 mm, then there will still be a consumption of such ammunition that it’s cheaper to just hit with a projectile.
    3. +3
      21 February 2023 09: 46
      Shells with remote detonation are a very expensive and complicated thing. In the current situation in our country, the production of tools and computing equipment for them is almost impossible.
      1. +1
        21 February 2023 15: 55
        That is, do you think that "Derivation" is a kind of "Potemkin village" with us? No, I perfectly understand the problems in micro and radio electronics, etc. we have.
      2. 0
        24 February 2023 22: 56
        Expensive and complex - how much, if not a secret? Such ZAKs are completely suitable for your parameters: all the most expensive - a weapon and a computer system - remain in the complex, and a consumable - a projectile with a radio timer or an optical, small LED (thus it will be programmed by laser, and not by coils). Is it that insanely difficult? It’s just that no one in the country is forcing the topic of advanced weapons, even during the NWO. We got used to traveling on Soviet luggage ...
    4. -5
      21 February 2023 12: 12
      Shilka, having shot down 1-2 drones, will be laid to rest by artillery or missiles. If anything hits at all.
      1. 0
        21 February 2023 15: 58
        I actually meant object air defense, not military .. And yes, the ZSU 23-4 needs to be deeply modernized, by the way, the Poles did it
      2. +1
        22 February 2023 14: 09
        The United States uses 20mm Phalanx ..... to protect objects and all sorts of embassies. Shoots down both MLRS and large mines.
    5. 0
      24 February 2023 23: 09
      Quote from: dmi.pris1
      A rocket, that's good. And what about a projectile with a remote detonation?

      1. The projectile will need a turn. The cost of the shell will have to be multiplied by the number of shells in the queue.
      2. The automatic gun has a requirement for the presence of time intervals between bursts. The longer the queue, the longer the interval.
  4. +2
    21 February 2023 06: 19
    will help to minimize the ratio of the cost of missiles to the cost of the target.
    And this is also not an unimportant fact. As an example, replicated in the media: Americans for balls worth $ 16 per piece. spent rockets worth 439 thousand dollars each.
    1. 0
      21 February 2023 08: 41
      Hefty interesting article. How to shoot down? We will shoot down with red lines, and then blue and blue. And when they run out, then chatter.
  5. -1
    21 February 2023 09: 27
    In my opinion, there is a lot of manual labor in the manufacture of this rocket. That is, its entire design is "sharpened" for small series. 5-10-100 pieces. And if thousands and tens of thousands are needed, the design should be completely different.
  6. +2
    21 February 2023 12: 10
    To counter cheap commercial drones, gasoline drones are needed, flying along a route with a passive radar and broadcasting the signal points found from the operator - it is a much more worthy target. A passive radar will shine less on him - anyhow, he will see the enemy’s radar farther than she sees him. Flight along the route will exclude the interception of electronic warfare. Well, artillery, mortars, hailstones, lancets, etc. work according to signal sources. Optionally, our anti-drone carries a small, slow but powerful air-to-ground missile. Further, enemy drones simply fall without control, the enemy runs out of operators.
    1. 0
      21 February 2023 12: 37
      And if you connect the signal source to the operator with a 100-meter ethernet cable? Where will the lancets go?
  7. +3
    21 February 2023 13: 47
    But the Americans decided to act according to the ancient principle "Similia similibus curantur" (like is cured by like) and developed the Coyote "anti-drone" drone and the mobile anti-aircraft system (C-UAS). The "everything you need" system includes an AN / TPQ-50 radar, optical and infrared cameras, a 30 mm Bushmaster cannon and a launcher for "anti-drone" drones.




    1. 0
      21 February 2023 14: 33
      As I understand it, the minus was squeezed by a certain flawed individual purely out of envy or wretchedness. Recently, the poor have gone straight to the site in a stormy stream.
    2. 0
      22 February 2023 14: 07
      The search for solutions is underway. The question of the price of "shooting down" the drone. You need to compare the cost with the "Shell". The ZRPK missile is not the most expensive. If you make a "small caliber" separately on such a machine, it will not be bad either.
    3. 0
      24 February 2023 23: 03
      Quote: Ruyter-57
      But the Americans decided to act according to the ancient principle "Similia similibus curantur" (like is cured by like) and developed the Coyote "anti-drone" drone and the mobile anti-aircraft system (C-UAS).

      And when something like LMUR, Whirlwind, Hellfire or Point-U arrives, what will this system do?
  8. +2
    21 February 2023 16: 40
    "Shell" is the most preferred,

    Perhaps if the shell with these missiles is used somewhere in the rear zone away from the LBS. In the frontline zone, where small-sized UAVs are used most actively and cause great damage, you do not use the wheeled shell, because of its high vulnerability to any shelling. The use of these missiles with the Tor, Tunguska air defense systems, AKM OSA or Strela carriers there will be more justified, since they have armor protection. Small and relatively cheap 19Y6 missiles are of course a good means of combating UAVs, but they will still be more expensive than 23,30, 57 mm shells with a remote fuse.
    1. +3
      22 February 2023 14: 41
      The LBS needs a very cheap drone fighter armed with a shotgun. With a high degree of probability, you can pick up a suitable copy in the field of aeromodelling. They can even be produced on the basis of DOSAAF and operators can be taken from there.
  9. 0
    21 February 2023 20: 05
    In order to save money, one could consider an intermediate version with a missile from the Tunguska for the Pantsir - 9M311. Prior to the start of mass production of 19Y6, it is easier to manually fasten four of them to the Pantsir launcher at least manually. For any 9M311, it is cheaper than 57E6, and in modern conditions, the resumption of production of the old model may be more profitable than mastering the production of the latest 19Ya6.
    1. 0
      24 February 2023 23: 17
      9M311 makes no sense. Useless for the tasks of the Shell.
  10. +1
    21 February 2023 20: 18
    Thanks for the interesting information!
    If there is an article on VO, then on the other side they also know about it.
    But it is better that we read about what the enemy already knows, to our own pleasure, than about what the other side did not yet know.
  11. +1
    21 February 2023 20: 24
    I have mixed feelings about this article. Well, because the characteristics given in this article are different from those that I had! Can be compared..............
    I have :............................................... ................................................. ................................................. ................

    In this article ............................................... ................................................. ..................................................


    That is, in "my" photo of Zura type 19Я6? (or "anti-aircraft nails") are placed in the TPK, standard for 57E6 (95Ya6) missiles; that is, with a "caliber" of 170 mm (diameter of the 1st stage ... of the upper stage of the missiles ...)! Based on the photo, you can estimate the "caliber" of the "anti-aircraft nail"! It turns out, somewhere, 57-60 mm ... and a 2-stage scheme! The characteristics were supposed to be approximately 5-7 km in range, and 3-... km in height! And here is the "new" data ... "package" instead of TPK and 80 mm instead of 57-60 mm! And a single-stage (it seems ...) scheme! What remains to be done? Wait? "Let's go" - we'll see!
    1. 0
      24 February 2023 22: 54
      Here is the Pantsir-SM with "small" missiles:
  12. 0
    21 February 2023 21: 21
    But I want to ask the whole community of couch experts a question, but where did such types of equipment and weapons as Shilka and Tunguska go. - And this, I assure you, I saw these machines in action against all sorts of drones Where are they and whether they are in service with our valiant army from kotyur .I didn’t even see them in the war zone, again our construction department did something with them.
    1. 0
      21 February 2023 21: 50
      Tunguska definitely took part. The video lit up at the very beginning, was captured.
    2. 0
      22 February 2023 04: 13
      Quote from: odisey3000
      But I want to ask the whole community of couch experts a question, but where did such types of equipment and weapons as Shilka and Tunguska go. - And this, I assure you, I saw these machines in action against all sorts of drones

      What did you see there? The sense of 30 mm shells without proximity fuses (there are none in the troops, and for 23 mm there is none in principle) is only in a direct hit, and when you still wait for it for a small target.
      1. +2
        22 February 2023 13: 57
        In the USA and China, they rely on the Gatling system for 5-12 20-30mm barrels. And the projectile does not have remote fuses.
        1. 0
          25 February 2023 10: 20
          Quote: Zaurbek
          In the USA and China, they rely on the Gatling system for 5-12 20-30mm barrels. And the projectile does not have remote fuses.

          They don’t, they did it against anti-ship missiles in the navy, they tried to transfer experience to land, but this doesn’t really work against small-sized UAVs.
  13. +1
    21 February 2023 22: 47
    It is also necessary to make 57mm installations on civilian chassis with integration into the same shell or torus. In the rear, you can attach an additional couple of three guns to defend some objects.
  14. 0
    22 February 2023 05: 56
    It is worth paying attention to the Second World War there and there will be an answer
  15. 0
    23 February 2023 08: 11
    since the measurement of the target parameters and the development of control commands are carried out on the launcher, and then they are transmitted to the missile via a radio channel
    a strange decision: the radio channel is simply jammed and direction found, especially when the enemy studies the captured equipment, after which the drone activates a pseudo-random change in the course of approach to the target, as a result, a clearly not cheap rocket turns into an ordinary unguided projectile. In addition, drones have not been flying alone for a long time, but operate in a group with a certain tactic.
    1. +1
      24 February 2023 22: 58
      Funny set of words. And it started with a false statement
      ... the radio channel is simply jammed ...
  16. -1
    25 February 2023 12: 24
    These are all kinds of UAVs with a maximum flight height of up to 6 kilometers, a distinctive feature of which, compared with missile weapons, is a low flight speed (maximum 70 m / s) and a generally straight flight path.

    The main targets for the missile under development can also include unguided and corrected projectiles of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) in the final phase of the flight.
    After reading this, I habitually decided that again nothing came of it. The ToR looks like a requirement to give birth to a cross between a dachshund and a suitcase, targeting almost every object in the sky.
    However, after reading the article, I was just filled with cautious optimism! How long has there been no reason for him ... If everything matches, then such a rocket is a very, very good solution! Of course, the launcher is too heavy for her, but if there was a rocket, then the launcher can be made. A very good thing and it seems that there will be no special miracles with the price. Just great news!
    Hopefully at least one more option is in development. It would be nice to remember, for example, that a couple of years ago the Americans announced the development of ultra-near-radius radars operating at Wi-Fi frequencies, and, apparently, using standard Wi-Fi points. By the way, they surprisingly quickly shut up on this matter ...