The evolution of Russian loitering ammunition against the backdrop of the Special Operation

UAV/BB "Kub-ULA" on the launch guide. Photo by Zala Aero / Kalashnikov Concern

Several types of loitering ammunition have recently entered service with the Russian army. This technique is now actively used in the Special Operation zone and hits various targets. In addition, a number of enterprises are engaged in improving finished structures and creating new ones. drones-kamikaze. When developing such projects, accumulated operational experience is used, which has a positive effect on the results of combat use.

Starting positions

The Russian military-industrial complex seriously took up the topic of loitering munitions (AM) in the second half of the XNUMXs. By the end of this period, the first samples were presented. At that time, testing and refinement of designs were carried out, and at the same time, concepts and tactics for their application were being formed. As a result of these processes, by the beginning of the Special Operation, our army managed to receive a certain number of BBs of two main types.

The first domestic BB presented to the general public was the “Cube-UAV” product from the Zala Aero company. It was made in the form of a plastic “tailless” with an electric motor and a pushing propeller. With a wingspan of approx. 1,2 m and weighing less than 10 kg, the drone carried a 3-kg warhead. The flight is carried out according to satellite navigation signals to a pre-specified target. The development of an optical-electronic system for target search and guidance was also reported.

Simultaneously with the “Cube”, the Lancet series BBs were created; in 2019-20 presented two such products with different dimensions and load. Both versions of the Lancet had a characteristic aerodynamic appearance with an elongated fuselage and two sets of X-shaped planes. The light modification “Lancet-1” weighed 5 kg and carried a warhead weighing 1 kg. Lancet-3 had a mass of 12 kg and carried a 3 kg load. The flight range reached 40 km; flight and guidance were carried out using an optical system.

The Lancet ammunition flies towards tank Leopard 2. Photo Telegram / "Archangel of Special Forces"

Apparently, before the beginning of 2022, the domestic industry was working on other BB projects - both completely new and based on existing designs. However, the results of these projects, suitable for use in practice, appeared after the start of the Special Operation.

Against the background of the Special Operation

Along with other weapons and equipment, in the spring of 2022, Russian troops involved in the Special Operation began to use the existing warheads. The ammunition used caused some damage to the enemy, and also helped to practice existing tactics of use. In addition, with their help, they accumulated experience for further operation and development of the design.

Taking into account new data, the existing BBs were modernized. Thus, the most actively developing of the “old” developments is the Lancet family. According to known data, the serial Lancet-3 has undergone modernization. Search and guidance equipment was replaced on it, and various combat units were installed. In order to increase protection against interference and interception, the remote control system and communications equipment were updated.

Completely new shock systems are also being developed, similar to the previous technology only in name. Thus, within the Lancet family, samples of reduced size and weight, long-range armored vehicles, new variants of warheads, etc. have been developed. Some of these products have already reached the front and are being actively used.

The Lancet dives into the Bukovel electronic warfare station. Photo Telegram / "Military informant"

As parts of helicopter-type UAVs became saturated, a new class of loitering munitions was formed. By installing one or another ammunition, the available copter turned into an FPV attack drone. This concept is simple, which has contributed to its widespread use. FPV kamikazes are manufactured in large quantities in different ways. They can be assembled from existing UAVs of any model, simply supplementing them with warheads, or built according to a special project.

Due to active use and a corresponding increase in the needs of troops, industry is expanding production. For example, the experience of one of the large companies that bought shopping centers and organized the production of UAVs and BBs in them became widely known. In addition, groups of enthusiasts have joined the production of such equipment. The simplest samples of loitering ammunition and FPV kamikazes can be assembled directly in military workshops.

Experience of application

During the Special Operation, our BB crews managed to accumulate extensive experience in operating such equipment, as well as find and/or improve methods for its effective use. At the same time, to date, a large number of products have been expended and a comparable number of targets have been hit. In general, it can be argued that BBs have become one of the most important strike weapons of the army.

According to the Lost Armor database, compiled on the basis of open and accessible information, Kub-UAV aircraft have been in use since May last year. Due to technical features, their use is not intensive - the authors of the database counted only 44 such episodes. 28 APs hit or damaged the target; the results of another 7 episodes are unknown. However, the actual amount of ammunition used may be significantly higher.

The FPV drone is heading towards the target; shooting with a UAV camera. Photo Telegram / "BOBR"

The Lancets of all versions are more widespread. Since July 2022, almost 700 episodes of their use have become known. Almost 590 products destroyed or damaged targets; the results of 60 episodes of use are unknown.

According to Lost Armour, FPV drones are being used even more actively, with 1466 such entries in the database. More than 1 thousand kamikaze vehicles hit, damaged or destroyed the target. For 227 cases of use, precise outcome data are not available.

Loitering ammunition is used against the entire range of targets present on the battlefield or behind enemy lines. Thus, “Lancets” are actively working against all types of artillery, in positions and on the march, as well as against armored vehicles. Episodes of successful destruction of NATO-style armored vehicles, incl. modern tanks. In addition, in recent weeks, extended-range UAVs have begun to be successfully used against targets at remote airfields.

FPV drones carry less powerful combat units. In this regard, they are used against concentrations of manpower and enemy positions, against unprotected equipment and other “soft” targets. Less high combat characteristics are compensated by relatively low cost. This makes it possible to make such warheads more widespread and to use them more actively in all sectors of the front for various tasks.

Technical evolution

Thus, in just a few years, Russian loitering ammunition has come a long way from new products at the exhibition to a full-fledged and massively used strike weapon of the armed forces. It is not difficult to see how this situation developed and what changes the direction as a whole and individual samples underwent.

M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle through the lens of an FPV drone. Photo Telegram / "BOBR"

Several years ago it all started with the development of two main samples with different architectures, fundamentally different methods of application, etc. The BBs of the first models were tested at domestic test sites and in Syria, and based on the results they were improved. By this time they were already being mass-produced and supplied to the troops.

The special operation to protect Donbass made it possible to evaluate the potential of existing warheads in the context of mass use against an advanced enemy with foreign equipment. In addition, appropriate production rates were needed. The demilitarization of the Kyiv regime also made it possible to accumulate experience and determine ways for further development of technology. New ideas have already been implemented in the form of projects and brought to series, and are also being used in practice.

After the start of the Special Operation, the development of the domestic direction of combat FPV drones began. In the shortest possible time, enterprises and enthusiasts were able to create such equipment, set up production and provide it to the troops. The army, in turn, uses the acquired capabilities and massively uses the received warheads.

The evolution of domestic loitering ammunition began not so long ago, but has now come a long way. The results of these processes are well known, and the need for BB no longer raises questions or disputes. Now we are talking only about continuing the development of an important and useful area.

Comments

[Lech from Android.]

It is logical to assume that UAVs like the Lancet will evolve into homing birds that only need to indicate the target area and give the order to destroy it... then such a device will do everything itself naturally under the control of the operator.
The war takes on a completely different character.

[Mavrikiy]

It seems to me that the disadvantage of the lancet is its layout. Its effectiveness against armored targets is sacrificed to aerodynamics. A guidance system (CH) is installed in the head of the warhead, instead of a cumulative warhead. CH can be moved down, or made spaced. It's a shame to see BBs hitting tanks without destroying them.

[Dmitry Ivanov_8]

Layout to reduce size and improve aerodynamics. I think the cumulative warhead in the center of the device doesn’t care about the presence of a piece of plastic in front of it in the form of a camera and guidance system. For the same Kornet missile, the warhead is generally located behind the missile engine, which does not prevent it from penetrating a conventional tank in the forehead. The penetration of a cumulative warhead is determined by the composition of the “funnel” and its diameter.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Mavrikiy

A guidance system (CH) is installed in the head of the warhead, instead of a cumulative warhead.

You will be surprised, but this is one of the standard ATGM configurations.
Here's Hellfire:

The Kornet's main warhead generally sits in the rear section.
And to the “TOU” with its head-mounted warhead it was necessary to attach a telescopic nose rod, which ensured the optimal distance for the detonation point of the warhead from the armor.

[alexoff]

The main drawback of the lancet is that it was used not with an anti-tank warhead, but with KZ-6 engineering ammunition. Now perhaps they are installing something else. They differ from anti-tank warheads in the large amount of explosives and, accordingly, a greater high-explosive effect, but their armor penetration is much worse, since the goals were set differently, and they were developed a long time ago. But the lance-bearers must not knock out enemy tanks three kilometers from our trenches; artillery, gunners and sappers must do this. The lancet must destroy artillery at great depths so that no one helps enemy tanks.

[Vadim S]

After all, war is the best engine of engineering! So maybe they didn’t know where to develop them, but here it’s clear what and how tests will be carried out.

[turembo]

Bigger, better, stronger! More equipment like this for the front, better than Western analogues, and to hit harder.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Practice has only confirmed the fact that loitering ammunition can occupy its own relatively small niche and in no way can replace ATGMs and tactical missiles.
Because the main contradiction is the need to fly for a long time and with a combat load. Making both larger at the same time means increasing the take-off weight and the final price of the ammunition.
And at the same time, survivability will invariably decrease, since the speed is not very high.
Therefore, it would be right to leave the attempts to make a wunderwaffe out of the “lancet” and leave it as it is. And research efforts and funds should be directed towards the development of missiles that are self-guided by illumination from UAVs for ground-based MLRS and aviation systems.

[Passing]

I support your position that mass-produced kamikaze drones can only have a small warhead, otherwise their effectiveness/cost drops sharply, and therefore they do not always destroy heavy equipment. Those. It looks like the target was hit, but in fact, after repairs, it is back in service. And they are, in principle, unable to solve the task of ensuring an attack on fortified positions. That is, in essence, it is a means of defense and trench warfare.
But ATGMs and missiles also have a lot of disadvantages. The first hit the target only in line of sight, which sharply narrows the scope of their application, the second are too, excessively expensive.
Ideal, universal, best in terms of cost/effectiveness - this is still the same good old art. Naturally, as a complex of different calibers and types, including mortars. But with the most important, fundamental nuance - in modern realities, without reconnaissance and guidance equipment (drones, radars), without long-range systems with high-precision projectiles, it sharply loses in effectiveness.
IMHO, until the art is properly upgraded, no drones will solve anything in this war, no matter how much they evolve.

[alexoff]

The lancet perfectly destroys artillery; I don’t understand why they are wasted on tanks (including abandoned ones) and other armored vehicles (and even ordinary vehicles). If the Ukrainian Armed Forces run out of artillery, then their tanks and infantry can write wills or surrender. There is a video from 700 lancets, but if they had only hit artillery, the Ukrainian Armed Forces would have nowhere to put NATO shells; our enemies don’t rivet howitzers at such a speed. In general, we use them on the front lines in a stupid way...

[cpls22]

The lancet perfectly destroys artillery, I don’t understand why they are wasted on tanks (including abandoned ones) and other armored vehicles (and even ordinary vehicles)

Everything is correct - long-range artillery is the main headache, but Lancets are apparently spent on all what they manage to see and catch.

[Passing]

Quote from alexoff

The lancet perfectly destroys artillery

If by artillery we mean towed artillery, then this is far from true. Go to the resource where Lancet lesions are collected. The same picture is observed:
1) When the Lancet is hit and detonated, the barrel of an artillery weapon, for example, like three axes, does not even move. Those. The warhead is so ridiculous that it is not even capable of moving the artillery. Those. The majority’s idea, inspired by spectacular footage with clouds of smoke and fire, that after being hit by the Lancet, what remains is a pile of mangled scrap metal, is fundamentally erroneous.
2) Spectacular puffs of smoke and fire occur in exactly one case - when lazy Ukrainian warriors keep the artillery in a charged state, and accordingly, if the cumulative jet successfully hits, the powder charge ignites. Those. when the stupidest enemy artillery operator realizes that you need to load only just before firing, then all the PR effectiveness of the Lancet against towed artillery will come to naught.
And this does not take into account that its flight speed is extremely insufficient for a successful counter-battery fight. For example, at 30 km it will fly for as much as 20 minutes. During this time, you can shoot back and leave the position, and the Lancet will fly and fly.
And the bottom line will be a system that is useless for counter-battery warfare and only creates the appearance of effectiveness. It hits, damages the barrel or the breech, or something else, this is a quick thing or not, but they repair it and put it back into service. As a result, the enemy’s amount of artillery does not decrease, but rather increases. The entire effect of the Lancet is increased repair costs and a decrease in the number of combat-ready barrels at one time. It's like drawing water with a sieve. Of course, there is some effect, and it’s much better than nothing, but it’s simply wiser to spend effort on something that is really effective, that destroys enemy artillery irrevocably, into dust. And this is our own 152 mm arta. Naturally modern format and environment corresponding to this concept.

[DO]

Passing,

the speed of its /*Lancet*/ flight is extremely insufficient for a successful counter-battery fight. For example, at 30 km it will fly for as much as 20 minutes. During this time, you can shoot back and leave the position, and the Lancet will fly and fly.

But the latest autonomous version of the Lancet is capable of independently searching for a target that has left its position, and, having found it, attacking it without the participation of an operator. Moreover, this can be done by a swarm of Lancets.
The development of a special version of the autonomous Lancet, for delivery to the required square by an MLRS missile, could reduce the approach time of autonomous Lancets and increase their range.

When hit and detonated by the Lancet, the barrel of an artillery weapon, for example, like three axes, does not even move. Those. The warhead is so ridiculous that it is not even capable of moving the artillery.

So, the purpose of triggering the Lancet’s shaped charge is not to nicely “ruffle” the barrel of the 777, but to burn a hole in it. The Armed Forces of Ukraine are unlikely to have an abundance of spare 777 barrels.

[cpls22]

The cubes were not useful, it turns out..
GLONASS is being jammed, apparently. Or there is no ability to quickly target targets using its coordinates.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from cpls22

The cubes were not useful, it turns out..

So... it flies slowly and not far, the warhead is small (for a product without precise guidance, only with SNS correction), it does not work against moving targets, and to hit it requires careful reconnaissance of the target.
In general, it is cheaper to spend a controlled "Lancet" than to bombard the target area with "Cubes". The "Lancet" at least shows what is in front of it and where it is better to hit this target.

[alexoff]

The cube is a geranium with a warhead of three kilos and a flight range of several tens of kilometers, it seems to have cost three million rubles. For that much money you can make FPV ghouls for about a hundred with similar efficiency

[MBRSS]

The Lancets of all versions are more widespread. Since July 2022, almost 700 episodes of their use have become known.
According to Lost Armour, FPV drones are being used even more actively, with 1466 such entries in the database.

It won't be enough! We need to produce 2 million IDP drones every month. Then, perhaps, there will be no need for new waves of mobilization of reserves. Just methodically knock out all the enemy's equipment, avoiding direct clashes. We need a drone of the Lancet-1 type, with an increased loitering time of up to 2-3 hours, cheap, in mega-commercial quantities. The body is plastic (unlike the milled metal one of the Lancet), with a max. number of 3D printed parts. Wings can also be printed segment by segment on 3D printers.
In short, we really need it drone armies !

[Nastia makarova]

How much is 2 million VPN drones in rubles?

[gsev]

Quote: Nastia Makarova

How much is 2 million VPN drones in rubles?

This quantity should be enough to kill or maim half a million military personnel and knock out all the transport 15 km from the contact line. If the Armed Forces of Ukraine suffered such losses per month, then the United States would not only consider it pointless to supply military equipment to drone strikes, but would also change its mind about accepting the $300 billion donated to it for the war with Russia by Nabiullina. If you believe the article, Russia carries out no more than 10-20 strikes per day with high-precision drones, of which about 5 are successful. If there were 100 successful strikes per day, then the Ukrainian Armed Forces would stop offensive activity; if there were 1000, then they would not be able to conduct defensive ones. 1000 strikes per day is only 50 drone strikes per month. A progressive tax on oligarchs and the financial and commercial elite of Russia, in conditions of low salaries for programmers and designers in Russia, would solve the problem of financing the military-industrial complex without it.

[MBRSS]

How much is 2 million VPN drones in rubles?

Well, it depends on how much the drones are :)
If it costs 100 thousand rubles, which is quite realistic given mass production, then the state can do it. After all, they squandered 300 green lards and didn’t even choke! As Putin said on this occasion, “we dealt with it.” Why not handle the release of drones? By the way, now the population has a lot of 3D printers sitting idle. Give the owners a 3D model and they won’t refuse to earn extra money. ABS plastic is quite a suitable material for elements such as the fuselage and wings. If necessary, it can be reinforced with carbon inserts, stringers, and spars. Missing electronics are purchased in China.

[gsev]

Pressing or stamping is much cheaper and more productive than 3D printing. 3D printing is, in principle, for small-scale products.

[MBRSS]

gsev, yes, it’s cheaper and more productive, but the molds themselves cost a lot of money and are not quickly developed and made. In addition, changes can be quickly made to the 3D model as it is tested in combat conditions.
I remember that a few months ago Khodakovsky announced that Donetsk craftsmen had made “an analogue of the Lancet, but an order of magnitude cheaper.” But since then we haven’t heard anything more about the development. Anyone know? Oh, and there was also Hi-82, which even seemed to be used.

[MBRSS]

Here's some info I found on Hello:
“The Privet-82 loitering ammunition is capable of carrying a warhead weighing more than 5 kilograms to a range of about 30 kilometers, while costing just over 100 thousand rubles.”
-- https://ria.ru/20230606/dron-1876551345.html

That is, if you rivet drones carrying less than 1 kg of explosives (cumulative grenade, fragmentation grenade), then you can meet 50 thousand rubles. a piece! Every infantryman must become a part-time drone pilot!

[MBRSS]

One of the beneficiaries of the private company Zala Aero is also the Deputy Minister of Defense. Do you think this is generally normal? Those. he can lobby for the Ministry of Defense to purchase exclusively Lancets and slow down or even eliminate the purchase of competing models. And Lancets are expensive and low-volume. Is this why we have so few aircraft-type IDP drones? Actually, apart from the Lancets, there is nothing much that is heard of.

[cpls22]

One of the beneficiaries of the private company Zala Aero is also the Deputy Minister of Defense.

Proof of the studio

[MBRSS]

cpls22
Zala Aero is a “daughter” (part of the group) of the Kalashnikov concern, 75% of which is owned by private individuals, among whom the main beneficiaries are Alexey Krivoruchko, Andrey Bokarev and Iskander Makhmudov. The first is the former general director of Kalashnikov, now deputy. Shoigu. I wasn't interested in the rest. All info from Wikipedia, if necessary

[alexoff]

Lancets are normal serial. Our respected partners laid out figures for how many lancets and other things they purchased, there are billions of rubles, not even tens. More than 2010 trillion have been spent on state defense orders since 20; you better think about where this massive amount of money went. Lancets fly and no one doubts their effectiveness. Where is Altius with Orion, the corsair and the stork, and I’m not talking about the Armata and other Kurgans? Zala belongs to its creator Zakharov, part of the shares belongs to Rostec. If we all were such swindlers as these lobbyists, we would have won long ago

[MBRSS]

alexoff
1) A thousand Lancets over 2 years of war is this a normal series??? Yes, I am aware of what the new workshops are doing, after which, as usual, everything will go “several times” faster, but so far there are not every day reports of the successful use of the Lancet. And there should be 5-10 of them daily.
2) the price of 3 million seems excessive. This is the price of three Chinese cars. I can’t even imagine what could be in the super-expensive design. Who would enlighten me?
3) I didn’t write that I think the Lancet is a bad car. Good car.
4) according to Wikipedia, Zakharov has a controlling 51%, the rest belongs to Kalashnikov, that is, lobbying may well take place. I’m simply embarrassed by the lack of competitors in such a young and promising market, where, in theory, there should be a ton of them. Specifically, disposable aircraft-type loitering UAVs.
5) I didn’t write about “swindlers”, I assumed Kalashnikov was lobbying for its products, and this applies not only to UAVs.
6) I didn’t put the minus!

[Dedok]

Quote: MBRBS

One of the beneficiaries of the private company Zala Aero is also the Deputy Minister of Defense. Do you think this is generally normal? Those. he can lobby for the Ministry of Defense to purchase exclusively Lancets and slow down or even eliminate the purchase of competing models. And Lancets are expensive and low-volume. Is this why we have so few aircraft-type IDP drones? Actually, apart from the Lancets, there is nothing much that is heard of.

so all the problems come from here: - distribution of financial flows - this is primarily, not UAVs, ammunition - necessary for LBS

[Dedok]

Quote from cpls22

One of the beneficiaries of the private company Zala Aero is also the Deputy Minister of Defense.

Proof of the studio

So last year the Kalashnikov concern changed from state-owned to private