UAV "Sirius-PVO": hunter of air attack weapons

71
UAV "Sirius-PVO": hunter of air attack weapons
UAV "Sirius". Image by Project SFERA Live


From detection to destruction


As part of solving the problem of combating low-flying air attack weapons (LAW), in particular, Ukrainian cruise missiles (CR) and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) - long-range kamikazes, in the material “Waiting for the Helios-RLD UAV: ​​for protection against low-flying air attack weapons” We examined a method for constructing a spatially distributed, dynamically changing air defense network that provides detection of low-flying air attack weapons, tens of kilometers deep and extending along the entire line of combat contact.



As the title of the article suggests, for this purpose long-range radar detection UAVs (AWACS) should be used, in particular, the Helios-RLD UAV planned for development by the Kronstadt group (RLD - radar patrol).


UAV "Helios-RLD"

Of course, it is necessary not only to humbly observe the passage of enemy airborne missiles, but to ensure their timely destruction. It would seem that the best solution is to organize the joint work of UAV-AWACS and ground-based anti-aircraft missile systems (SAM) - the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation (RF Armed Forces) have already implemented the joint work of the S-400 long-range air defense system and A-50U AWACS aircraft, which made it possible to ensure the destruction enemy combat aircraft and helicopters deep within its territory, even when flying at low altitudes.

However, the defeat of air defense systems against low-flying targets beyond the radio horizon requires the use of expensive anti-aircraft guided missiles (SAMs) with active radar homing heads (ARLGSN). If we ensure the destruction of expensive enemy planes and helicopters, then from the point of view of the cost-effectiveness criterion this is justified, but for the hunt for cheap kamikaze UAVs, the use of missiles with ARLGSN looks wasteful, and they will simply never be produced in the same quantities as and kamikaze UAVs.


The 9M96E2 SAM with ARLGSN can be used by the S-350, S-400 air defense systems and the Poliment-Redut ship-based air defense system.

On the other hand, the long-range KR and kamikaze UAVs used by Ukraine are in some ways more complex, but at the same time, in some ways easier to hit targets.

On the one hand, they have a low radar and thermal signature, move at low altitudes, and cruise missiles also travel at fairly high speeds; on the other hand, their maneuverability is limited, they cannot jam and make sharp maneuvers to evade an attack in the same way as this can be done by a manned combat aircraft, and the speed of a kamikaze UAV is often less than the speed of a good car (however, in some cases this can be an advantage).


Ukrainian long-range kamikaze UAV "Beaver"

The use of manned combat aircraft to combat low-flying airborne attack aircraft is also not ineffective. While this still makes sense to repel a massive attack by cruise missiles, shooting down dozens, and in the future hundreds (within one raid) of cheap low-speed kamikaze UAVs with the help of expensive air-to-air missiles is not entirely rational.

As for cannon weapons, they are ineffective against cruise missiles, and in relation to low-speed kamikaze UAVs, let us remember the Ukrainian MiG-29, which knocked itself out with the debris of the Russian Geran UAV it shot down.

In addition, the time spent on duty and the operational efficiency of manned combat aircraft are limited by the endurance of the crew, and all this is superimposed on the resource consumption of expensive combat vehicles.


It’s not the job of the Su-57 and others like it to chase after every little thing. Image from the Russian Ministry of Defense

It can be assumed that the optimal solution would be a combination of Helios-RLD UAVs, which provide primary detection of air defense systems, and air defense UAVs, which carry out additional search and destruction of air defense systems.

The conventional Sirius-Air Defense UAV can be considered as such a hunter UAV. It is necessary to immediately make a reservation that if the Helios-RLD UAV is a real development, then the Sirius-Air Defense UAV is just a concept; such a modification of the Sirius UAV does not yet exist, at least according to open data.

UAV "Sirius-Air Defense"


As we already said in the previous article, at the moment the Sirius UAV has already made its first flight, apparently, it is being tested and preparing for mass production.


UAV "Sirius". Image overclockers.ru, Zelikman blog

How suitable is this vehicle for use in hunting enemy airborne weapons?

In terms of the duration of its stay in the air, which is somewhere on the order of a day, the Sirius UAV should be comparable to the Helios-RLD UAV. He doesn’t particularly need high altitude and flight speed - he will have to act primarily against low-flying airborne missiles.

An optical-electronic station (OES), including a thermal imager, should be used as a means of further searching for explosive weapons and targeting weapons at them. The possibility of installing a small-sized radar station (radar) cannot be ruled out - their joint work with the EPS will increase the likelihood and speed of detecting enemy airborne weapons.

In addition, by analogy with the possibility discussed for the Helios-RLD UAV in the previous material, the Sirius-Air Defense UAV can be equipped with ultraviolet (UV) radiation sensors to detect radiation from missile launch vehicles and V-V missiles, as well as devices release of protective traps.


OES of the Sirius UAV (highlighted in green), and the white color of the body (highlighted in red) presumably indicates its radio transparency and the possibility of placing a radar in this place (however, this can also be done to place antennas for communication and control equipment there)

As for weapons, it presumably includes 9K121M Vikhr-M anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), capable of hitting low-speed air targets. It can be assumed that the integration of Igla/Verba man-portable anti-aircraft missile systems (MANPADS) with an infrared (IR) seeker into the armament of the Sirius-Air Defense UAV will not become a big problem.


Igla-S MANPADS missile and launcher. Image by Vitaly V. Kuzmin

The possibility of integrating the 9M340 missiles from the Sosna air defense system into the armament of the Sirius-PVO UAV, which are guided by tele-orientation in a laser beam (“laser path”), like the Vikhr-M ATGM. The weight of the 9M340 missile defense system in the transport and launch container (TPC) is about 30–40 kilograms, which, along with the Igla/Verba MANPADS missiles, makes it extremely attractive for placement on a MALE class UAV.


SAM 9M340

Hunting algorithm


After receiving initial information about air targets from the Helios-RLD UAV or other reconnaissance means, the Sirius-Air Defense UAVs must move in the direction of their movement, carry out additional search for airborne targets using their own reconnaissance means and defeat them with existing weapons.

It can be assumed that there will be no problems with slow-moving, poorly maneuvering Ukrainian kamikaze UAVs, but at the same time it will be quite difficult to ensure a high probability of destroying cruise missiles like Storm Shadow. It is possible that the likelihood of destroying modern stealth missiles can be increased by introducing short-range V-V missiles of the R-73/RVV-MD type with an IR seeker into the armament of the Sirius-Air Defense UAV. R-73/RVV-MD missiles are redundant for destroying kamikaze UAVs, but cruise missiles are already quite an adequate target for them.


V-V R-73/RVV-MD missile. Image by Kirill Borisenko

It is necessary to understand that even if the effectiveness of the Sirius-Air Defense UAV against cruise missiles is small, then intercepting most of the kamikaze UAVs will be of utmost importance, since it is with their help that the enemy will try to overload the target air defense by launching combined attacks with massive use Kamikaze UAVs and a limited number of cruise missiles in a salvo.

Cruise missiles are expensive, Ukraine itself practically cannot produce them, except for the semi-handicraft production of a limited number of Neptune anti-ship missiles (ASMs) modified against ground targets, Western countries will also not supply missiles in the thousands, but they will purchase kamikaze UAVs and Ukraine can potentially produce tens of thousands of units.

In many ways, the effectiveness of an air defense barrier built from the Helios-RLD UAV and the Sirius-Air Defense UAV will depend on how many of these vehicles will be in service and how many of them can be in the air at the same time. Based on this, the protected air defense zone can be increased both in depth and along the front, increasing the likelihood of damage to air defense systems.

It is necessary to mention one more important point - ground-based air defense systems should not operate in the coverage area of ​​the Helios-RLD UAV and Sirius-PVO UAV, since during intensive combat work, problems with state identification will inevitably arise, as a result of which expensive combat vehicles will die in vain from “friendly fire”. That is, there must be a certain zone for joint combat work of the Helios-RLD UAV and the Sirius-Air Defense UAV, and after this the zone of responsibility of ground-based and ship-based air defense systems should begin.


As we have already said in relation to the Helios-RLD UAV, the reconnaissance contour built with their help will be dynamic - the enemy will never be able to know which area is covered better or worse, since due to the movement of the UAV even at an average speed of about 200 kilometers per an hour later, in half an hour or an hour, the configuration of the air defense zone can completely change.

All of the above applies to the reconnaissance and strike circuit, which includes both the Helios-RLD UAV and the Sirius-Air Defense UAV.

Conclusions


As practice shows, UAVs for various purposes will play an increasingly important role in combat operations. At the moment, these machines are not yet used in any way to solve air defense problems, despite the enormous prospects in this area.

The construction on the basis of the Helios-RLD UAV and the Sirius-Air Defense UAV of a reconnaissance and strike contour - a spatially distributed, dynamically changing air defense network that ensures the detection and destruction of air attack weapons, with a depth of tens of kilometers and an extension along the entire line of combat contact, will significantly reduce the effectiveness of enemy attacks carried out using low-flying airborne missiles, primarily kamikaze UAVs.

Potentially, a combination of Helios-RLD UAVs and Sirius-PVO UAVs can also fight more complex targets, such as stealth cruise missiles.

No ground, air or space reconnaissance means will allow the enemy to plan the flight route of low-flying air defense systems bypassing air defense systems, since the network configuration will dynamically change in real time.
71 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    10 January 2024 05: 15
    reconnaissance and strike contour - a spatially distributed, dynamically changing air defense network that ensures the detection and destruction of air attack weapons, tens of kilometers deep and extending along the entire line of combat contact, ... carried out with the help of low-flying air defense systems, primarily kamikaze UAVs.

    It's almost like
    Swap in trading
    among bankers and stockbrokers, when behind verbal tinsel they try to fool people’s heads and show how “cool” they are
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. -2
      10 January 2024 08: 43
      Quote: Amateur
      among bankers and stockbrokers, when behind verbal tinsel they try to fool people’s heads and show how “cool” they are

      Behind this verbal tinsel, ordinary spelling errors are still hidden:
  2. +1
    10 January 2024 05: 17
    Without challenging the concept, I doubt its all-weather capability. As far as I know, neither Sirius nor Helios are equipped with anti-icing devices. However, I could be wrong
    1. -3
      10 January 2024 09: 42
      This UAV, like the Orion, has no engines. They can't copy Rotax. We don’t need to “hang noodles on our ears.” There is no Orion UAV, they built a whole plant, but there are no UAVs. The Orion (Pacer) has one engine, and the Sirius has two. APD-115T is a crude engine on which they have been cutting money for years...

      https://newizv.ru/news/2021-01-13/tsap-tsarap-ne-poluchaetsya-pochemu-ne-letayut-rossiyskie-bespilotniki-317595

      This is the first problem, and the second is the lack of military closed satellite channels for exchanging information in real time with the ability to transmit images in high resolution. They lie to you all the time. For example: "Orlan-10" is controlled at a distance of 120 km in the blind, but the picture can be transmitted only 10 km. The question is, what is the combat radius of the Orlan-10? The answer is 10 km, not 120 km! The same nonsense about “Orions” and “Siriuses”. But the fact that they fly far and shoot a movie on a storage device that can be watched after landing does not change anything. So it turns out that reconnaissance can’t see anything further than binoculars. Here you go guys, chew some new candy...
      1. +1
        10 January 2024 10: 27
        a wide selection of engines is on the way, and this is already in full-scale mass production (see "Made with us")
        VK-650, VK-800, VK-1600
      2. +3
        10 January 2024 11: 56
        And the drones from the hall, which correct the work of the lancets in depth - this is so - a “fairy tale”.
      3. +4
        10 January 2024 12: 56
        Quote: Totvolk80
        This UAV, like the Orion, has no engines. They can't copy Rotax. We don’t need to “hang noodles on our ears.” There is no Orion UAV, they built a whole plant, but there are no UAVs.

        In what sense no? Are there any losses of this UAV, but there is no engine or UAV? Or if the engine was imported under a gray scheme then it’s not there either? In this case, there are no lancets, no geraniums, and nothing at all
        Quote: Totvolk80
        Orlan-10" is controlled at a distance of 120 km in the blind, and the picture can be transmitted only 10 km. The question is, what is the combat radius of the "Orlan-10"? The answer is 10 km, not 120 km! The same nonsense about "Orions" and " Sirius."

        Orlan, to put it mildly, differs from Orion in size. By your logic, for example, the filmed arrivals of Ukrainian planes at the airfield are nonsense? Or when a rocket flies at awarded Ukrainian artillerymen, is it nonsense?
        Are you sure you're not a sissy type?
        1. 0
          10 January 2024 13: 22
          What is the transmission range of a video image in real time in good resolution from the contact line of the Orion UAV? A little more than "Orlan"! After all, it also takes off from an airfield with a control and landing station... Why was not a single M142 HIMARS launcher destroyed? Why does a UAV over the enemy remove the sowing of fields with shells, and not direct guided missiles? Have you ever thought? Use your head!
          1. -1
            10 January 2024 14: 31
            Quote: Totvolk80
            What is the transmission range of a video image in real time in good resolution from the contact line of the Orion UAV?

            Which? 10 km? How does a lancet with a picture arrive at a distance of 80 km from the LBS, but Orion is not enough because Orlan-10?
            Quote: Totvolk80
            After all, it also takes off from an airfield with a control and landing station...

            Can't the LBS have a repeater?
            Quote: Totvolk80
            Why haven't any M142 HIMARS launchers been destroyed?

            Why was more than one Caesar installation destroyed? After all, it’s 10 km, and they’re shooting at 40, we saw them once
            Why can’t the Ukrainian Armed Forces allocate an Osa-type air defense system to each Khemars? Or is Orion invisible on radar?
            Quote: Totvolk80
            Why does a UAV over the enemy remove the sowing of fields with shells, and not direct guided missiles?

            Because Orion has 10 km communication?
            Quote: Totvolk80
            Have you ever thought? Use your head!

            Did you write this to yourself?
            1. 0
              11 January 2024 10: 59
              Can't the LBS have a repeater?

              Competent sources report that even a disposable FPV drone now has aerial... flying repeaters. and not on LBS.
              1. -1
                11 January 2024 13: 33
                Well, as you can see, we have particularly competent sources in the comments, and for them it all comes down to the Orlan-10, model 2010.
                1. 0
                  11 January 2024 18: 18
                  In some ways, your opponent is right. My own Starlink would help so much.

                  Well, in general, you are parvah, without some kind of repeater system, nothing used at all would work even directly on the LBS, not to mention the serious ranges of which there are many examples of use.
                  1. -1
                    11 January 2024 18: 26
                    Quote: alexmach
                    In some ways, your opponent is right. My own Starlink would help so much.

                    It would help, of course, but I heard satellite communications are a generally known thing and there are even domestic ones, even for ordinary people, only the speed is worse, the ping is higher and the antenna is more massive. You can’t fit something like that into an eagle, but it’s been a long time since it’s been done in an orion. I think soon Westerners will tell us that we don’t have rockets, because rockets were invented by Musk
                    1. 0
                      11 January 2024 20: 45
                      only the speed is worse, the ping is higher and the antenna is more massive

                      Here you go. According to recent rumors from the opposing side, “Baba Yaga” carries an antenna for Starlink and a repeater antenna for FPV. Due to the large number of satellites, ping and bandwidth, it is possible to use “space technologies” even in such small and mass-produced drones. And achieve better range parameters as a result. On unmanned fireboats, the antenna has long been the property of the general public.
                      1. +2
                        11 January 2024 20: 53
                        We also planned the sphere. The Supreme won advertised in 2018, as far as I remember, but the joke was that the state decided that it did not need it and there should be investors. And then they blamed Rogozin for saying that he couldn’t say how much money he needed for the sphere, although it’s a no-brainer that the more they give, the more satellites there will be, which Rogozin seems to be launching not for himself, but for everyone, including the military . But we have an excuse for Rogozin, so he is to blame for everything.
                        We just have a problem with boats; there was more than one such article in VO. Without any satellite communications, it’s stupid to transport fighters, piece production in wild cramps
      4. +1
        13 February 2024 10: 13
        Quote: Totvolk80
        Can't copy Rotax
        What kind of strange fantasies are these? Analogs of Rotax have been produced continuously from the USSR period to the present. 2 factories were designed for this. Another thing is that financial flows are not directed to industry, but to playing on the stock exchange.
      5. 0
        28 March 2024 20: 08
        Go back to the depths of your garbage dump TsIP-shitty being)))) Go fix the sewerage system in Kyiv, better yet, it’s breaking through for the second time as soon as a couple of TU-eks take off)

        the absence of military closed satellite channels for the exchange of information in real time with the ability to transmit images in high resolution. They lie to you all the time. For example: "Orlan-10" is controlled at a distance of 120 km in the blind, but the picture can be transmitted only 10 km

        With such luck, our lancelet X-masters need to play roulette if they hit it blindly like that))
        The entire YouTube is filled with videos filmed on the “drives” of Bugaga lancets))
        https://youtu.be/IdCb5fT_LQU?si=cvoga-jIILV39yM6&t=32

        Your planes, ukrov, are stationed 10 km from the front))) 1 strikes, the second is removed and everything is “written” to the drive)))

        Damn, what's wrong with your brains...
  3. +2
    10 January 2024 05: 41
    UAV - hunters should apparently have different engines: one for loitering, the other for attack.
  4. +1
    10 January 2024 05: 41
    UAV - hunters should apparently have different engines: one for loitering, the other for attack.
  5. 0
    10 January 2024 05: 45
    Oh. But our UAV Orion-Pacer has already fired at air targets with an X-UAV missile (a “cornet” converted from a laser path to a semi-active laser illumination).
    Why bother with something new when everything already exists?
  6. +2
    10 January 2024 06: 07
    Air defense - missile defense, complex, integrated system...
    All new elements that make it more efficient are welcome!!!
    What conclusion does the article lead to... the person tried, collected information, expressed his vision... this is normal.
    So, let’s wait and see what results it will show.
    Practice is the criterion of truth... and for weapons, everything is learned in battle.
  7. 0
    10 January 2024 06: 07
    Air defense - missile defense, complex, integrated system...
    All new elements that make it more efficient are welcome!!!
    What conclusion does the article lead to... the person tried, collected information, expressed his vision... this is normal.
    So, let’s wait and see what results it will show.
    Practice is the criterion of truth... and for weapons, everything is learned in battle.
  8. +1
    10 January 2024 06: 32
    This would be implemented at least in an experimental version. Only this is for several applications. The enemy will immediately come up with countermeasures. For example, the same flying electronic warfare, the same heat traps. But we need to develop and look for the right approach. Maybe try to tie such UAVs into an air defense complex at the initial stage, and only then move on to AI and autonomous operation.
  9. +1
    10 January 2024 06: 58
    I don’t know about Helios and Sirius, but it’s quite obvious that other UAVs must fight UAVs. The Maviks must be shot down by the Orlans with the appropriate equipment. Ukrainian analogs of "eagles" - shoot down larger and faster UAVs. and so on. and it is better to hit not with guided missiles, but with machine-gun fire. or, in the case of small UAVs, a shotgun blast. a “friend or foe” recognition system will have to be created one way or another
    1. +5
      10 January 2024 07: 38
      Conceptually incorrect approach. Any controlled weapon will be too expensive for an FPV drone, which costs 40-50 thousand rubles. Arrows (drones) can be fought with electronic warfare means, their operating frequencies are known. There is a Bulat drone detector, made on the knee by A. Filatov’s group. What prevents you from combining it with a “trench” electronic warfare station, which will be launched by a signal from a drone detector and suppress the detected frequency? This is technically not difficult to do - much easier than blocking some kind of interceptor drone with micro-missiles, detection equipment, etc. The enemy drone detects itself - with its outgoing signal with telemetry and video stream. And it’s much easier to suppress it.
      The archer (drone crews) must be fought. This is possible and much more effective than fighting with arrows. For some reason, this topic is clearly not cutting-edge. We need a drone with a radio-technical reconnaissance module (for identifying and direction finding of operating drone consoles and radio stations) and a laser target designation module for the Krasnopol aircraft. Such modules already exist and are standard installed on the Orlan-30. But you need to add a portable container for radio-technical reconnaissance and enable the drone to point Krasnopol at a radio-emitting target in real time.
      1. +1
        10 January 2024 13: 05
        Quote: Slon1978
        Any controlled weapon will be too expensive for an FPV drone, which costs 40-50 thousand rubles.

        What if this weapon is a turret with a saiga loaded with duck cartridges?
        1. -1
          11 January 2024 01: 25
          Alexander, you are obviously very far from solving practical problems. It's just not serious somehow. You tape the gun onto the drone with blue tape and then what? Mavik makes a drop from a height and, in most cases, it is not visible or heard. You will only find out about it after the first grenade falls. The FPV drone attacks quickly and mostly almost on the move and will not give you time to get your flying shotgun into the air. That is, you will need to have at least 4 operators who will keep your flying shotgun in the air 24/7, replacing each other every 2 hours, will sleep in turns and will keep an eye on the remote control and the starry sky, you will also need to have a bag batteries and a generator for their continuous recharging. Carry gasoline to the generator at least once a day, under fire, of course, and to the detriment of the delivery of ammunition, water and food. You will make all the Ukrainians in the area laugh. And I assure you that the enemy FPV drone will eventually, and not at all by chance, fly to your positions just when your batteries run out or the operators decide to stop this circus for a smoke break. I'm not even talking about how much even a simple double-barreled shotgun weighs (even with cut barrels and a sawed-off butt - it's at least 2,5 kg), what the carrying capacity of standard FPV drones is (not everyone has even these 2,5 kg, which allows attach only the lightest PG-7VM shot weighing 2 kg to it) and what will happen to the same Mavic or FPV drone after a shotgun is fired in the air, where a device costing from 400 thousand rubles will fly away. after the first such shot. Ideas with flying shotguns are complete and utter nonsense, which is not at all applicable to reality and the drone models available at the front.
          1. -1
            11 January 2024 13: 30
            No, you are far from a real understanding of the situation. Electronic warfare will participate in the same fight against drones, today it works, tomorrow the frequencies have changed, AI has been introduced and electronic warfare does not help, while shot will always destroy the target. The drone fighter, of course, must be at least 10 times larger than the target and have the means of detecting them, and not just have someone look for the target on the monitor for a long time. In aviation, fighters are much more complex and expensive than other aircraft, but what’s more - predators are much more complex than their victims. You are either talking about conceptual things, or about what cheap drones can be used to hastily cobble together defense at the front
        2. 0
          9 March 2024 22: 41
          Try to watch and evaluate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAmNR7fDrGg
          1. -1
            9 March 2024 23: 00
            Look for a long time, click and it looks like they're knocking it down. And if you don’t shoot from a semi-automatic saiga, but upgrade it back to automatic mode for at least a hundred rounds per minute, make a belt feed and install it on a stabilized platform with automatic aiming, then it won’t fly closer than 40 meters.
            1. -1
              10 March 2024 00: 33
              Don’t tell me... the recoil will torture this... product...
              1. -1
                10 March 2024 02: 16
                Would you say that a shotgun has more recoil than a PKT, for example? Then I can suggest stealing the secret drawings of SPAS12, it has low recoil and shoots automatically.
  10. +1
    10 January 2024 07: 01
    . Hunting algorithm

    After receiving initial information about air targets from the Helios-RLD UAV or other reconnaissance means, the Sirius-Air Defense UAVs must move in the direction of their movement

    Sirius is not an interceptor. Sirius's speed (180 km/h) is approximately the same as that of low-speed UAVs. He can neither catch up nor intercept.
    1. +1
      10 January 2024 09: 18
      If the detection is early, and a chain of such hunters is constantly patrolling in the air, then you may well have time to meet them.
      1. +1
        10 January 2024 09: 21
        Quote from cpls22
        If the detection is early, and a chain of such hunters is constantly patrolling in the air, then you may well have time to meet them.

        If only on a collision course. And if, in the meantime, the UAV changes its route, then “interceptors” flying at the same speed will no longer be able to catch up with it and pursue it.
        1. +1
          10 January 2024 09: 24
          Yes. Unless others patrolling the adjacent sector of the border provide backup.
  11. +1
    10 January 2024 07: 19
    UAVs are certainly interesting, but why is the issue of using airships not being considered? In the USSR, an AWACS system was created using airships, isn’t it time to take out those documents and blow the dust off them?
    And if you really want to carry out interception using a UAV, then the Okhotnik UAV is more suitable for creating such a platform, it would also be taught to refuel in the sky and in general it would be great, a link of such “Hunters” could quite reliably cover any of our bases fleet basing
  12. +5
    10 January 2024 07: 26
    Kronstadt tested its UAVs before the SVO, continues to test them during the SVO, and I’ll probably guess right if I assume that they will finish their tests right after the SVO. Because in this case they will not have to prove the effectiveness of their products in combat conditions, as well as confirm the overall viability of the concepts of such products as Helios-RLD and Sirius. Therefore, no matter how long the SVO lasts, they “will continue testing” and “are preparing for mass production,” or rather, use government funds on products that are already conceptually outdated, continue to tell us about their prospects and actually invent absurd tasks for their UAVs. Although it should be the other way around - a UAV should solve pressing problems, be cheap and numerous. And not fancy, expensive, few in number and useless. The relevance of Sirius is “confirmed” by Bayraktar, which is located on the outskirts of the Northern Military District and has not been used for its intended purpose (as an attack drone) for a long time. But this does not bother Kronstad - they “continue to prepare for mass production.”
    The front needs a drone - a hunter for radio-emitting targets. Needed yesterday and a lot. Simple, cheap and plentiful. And not "Sirius", "Orions" and "Helios-RLD". We need a drone based on the Orlan-30 or its slightly larger, scaled version. So that it could carry two modules: (1) radio-technical reconnaissance - for identifying, classifying and direction finding radio-emitting battlefield targets, such as operating drone consoles, communication radios, electronic warfare stations and (2) a laser target designation module for high-precision projectiles Krasnopol. This will work and will allow our people to advance, overcoming the terror of FPV drones and Maviks with drops.
    1. +2
      10 January 2024 09: 06
      What can Krondschat do? These are a bunch of assholes with connections to the Moscow Region. All their cars are complete copies of other people's cars; they have no ideas of their own. Well, they showed another cart, but whose engines? The speed is low, they won’t catch up with someone else’s mechanism. They also want it to hang in the air and race for a long time. But that doesn't happen. Or rather, it’s possible, but if you’re “Chinese” then you can’t. And until someone does it, and they copy someone else’s idea, they will not win.
  13. 0
    10 January 2024 07: 59
    Tracking a UAV from the air against the ground is a bad idea. How to distinguish a UAV from a car, for example, or another object moving on the ground.
    1. +1
      10 January 2024 08: 19
      Quote: ism_ek
      How to distinguish a UAV from a car, for example, or another object moving on the ground.

      Let’s say cars cannot move straight (without turning) over rough terrain... Well, and for other reasons that everyone doesn’t need to know...
      1. +1
        10 January 2024 10: 56
        Quote: ROSS 42
        Let's say cars cannot drive straight (without turning) over rough terrain...

        How will you understand at night that the terrain is rough?
        In theory, everything is simple, but put yourself in the shoes of an operator who is forced to look at a screen for hours, which simultaneously sees dozens of moving objects.
        1. 0
          11 January 2024 11: 58
          Well, in general, a ground object and a flying one can be easily distinguished by the parallax of the surface. We are not observing from a static tower. And from an aircraft! Which means we ourselves are moving. And as a result, there will be a strong displacement of the background (surface) relative to the enemy drone.
  14. +1
    10 January 2024 08: 41
    As part of solving the problem of combating low-flying air attack weapons (LAW), in particular, Ukrainian cruise missiles (CR) and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) - long-range kamikazes, in the material “Waiting for the Helios-RLD UAV: ​​for protection against low-flying air attack weapons" we reviewed a method for constructing a spatially distributed dynamically changing an air defense network that provides detection of low-flying air attack weapons, tens of kilometers deep and extending along the entire line of combat contact.

    It is my deep conviction that you cannot examine any nuances of creation and production without having any influence on it.
    And further. In the USSR, little military products were put on public display, but they were afraid of him. And today information for official use is waved at all corners.
  15. 0
    10 January 2024 08: 49
    It seems to me that to destroy UAVs it is easier to use something like a Super Tucano with a machine gun. Ammunition can be enough for a dozen low-speed non-maneuvering targets
    1. +1
      10 January 2024 09: 08
      And it's very simple. We have a Kalashnikov tank machine gun with an electric trigger. Just a hanging container
      1. +1
        10 January 2024 09: 35
        Quote: Uncle Vlad
        And it's very simple. We have a Kalashnikov tank machine gun with an electric trigger. Just a hanging container

        It's better instead of an engine. It fired in the opposite direction, accelerated, in the forward direction it froze and fell.
        1. +1
          10 January 2024 09: 51
          Quote: qqqq
          It's better instead of an engine. It fired in the opposite direction, accelerated, in the forward direction it froze and fell.

          This is why for such systems it is necessary to create special weapons, bombs and missiles, and not to customize existing ones. Here our field is not plowed. Although I understand that it is easier to modify a ready-made system, but will it work out better?
          1. +2
            10 January 2024 11: 16
            Quote: APASUS
            Quote: qqqq
            It's better instead of an engine. It fired in the opposite direction, accelerated, in the forward direction it froze and fell.

            This is why for such systems it is necessary to create special weapons, bombs and missiles, and not to customize existing ones. Here our field is not plowed. Although I understand that it is easier to modify a ready-made system, but will it work out better?

            At least it’s easy for us to launch something heavy as a UAV in series. So far there are only promises that it’s almost there... And as for the machine gun, the mass of the UAV itself plays a role here, because... any rifle has recoil force. If you look, when firing from an air cannon, the plane sags greatly in speed, and a light UAV will simply fly in the opposite direction. And there is no point in shooting from a small gun.
            1. +1
              10 January 2024 12: 07
              Quote: qqqq
              As for the machine gun, the mass of the UAV itself plays a role here, because any rifle has recoil force. If you look, when firing from an air cannon, the plane sags greatly in speed, and a light UAV will simply fly away in the opposite direction. And there is no point in shooting from a small gun.

              That’s what I’m talking about. Weapons for UAVs have completely different performance characteristics and simply adjusting existing weapons looks logical, but this is the easiest way. In fact, the weapons must be created anew
              1. -1
                10 January 2024 19: 30
                Quote: APASUS
                Weapons for UAVs have completely different performance characteristics and simply adjusting existing weapons looks logical, but this is the easiest way. In fact, the weapons must be created anew

                Well, why not adapt a light machine gun? A fighter can hold it, which means that a drone weighing one hundred to one hundred and fifty kilos will not catch it. RPL-20 of some kind, from a kilometer or less will begin to cut off enemies
                1. 0
                  11 January 2024 14: 19
                  Quote from alexoff
                  Well, why not adapt a light machine gun?

                  Both the machine gun and the grenade launcher have recoil. And this greatly affects the flight performance of the UAV itself. At the same time, the system of aiming, guidance and control of ammunition in motion must be worked out. For this reason, this is another niche for gunsmiths
                  1. -1
                    11 January 2024 16: 11
                    Quote: APASUS
                    And this greatly affects the flight performance of the UAV itself.

                    And the air cannon affects the flight performance of the fighter. Drones have been equipped with rifles many times, including shotguns, some of which have very little recoil, such as the spas-12. If you do this seriously, and not on your knees in the garage, then the problem can be solved
                    1. 0
                      11 January 2024 16: 27
                      Quote from alexoff
                      If you do this seriously, and not on your knees in the garage, then the problem can be solved

                      Yes, this is serious work. The problem is that the target is moving, the UAV itself is moving and there are weather conditions. This is a huge job and the existing processor power is most likely not enough. For a small UAV this task is most likely not solvable; there is not enough autonomous computing power
                      1. -1
                        11 January 2024 16: 43
                        Quote: APASUS
                        The problem is that the target is moving, the UAV itself is moving and there are weather conditions. This is a huge job and the existing processor capacity is most likely not enough.

                        This is not such a difficult task; from some flying fortress this was solved with tube computers and not the most brilliant operator. Nowadays it’s still simpler, now a Chinese phone for 10 thousand rubles is much smarter than a top-end computer from 15 years ago, and top-end PCs that are under sanctions cost 30 thousand rubles each, like the cheapest drone
                        Quote: APASUS
                        For a small UAV, this task is most likely not solvable; there is not enough autonomous computing power

                        How small is it that can be launched from the palm of your hand? This is some kind of apex predator concept emerging for the top of the food chain. Cats hunt mice, not some fighting voles
    2. 0
      11 January 2024 12: 08
      This could be suitable against subsonic medium and heavy UAVs. And against small, and even more so FPV drones, it is useless. Because they are too small, fly too low and are too nimble. It will be difficult for a pilot of an airplane flying a so-called “Super Tucano” to even just see such a drone.

      Although such a plane would not hurt.
      Firstly, as an interceptor of medium and heavy drones (they still either do not have or have limited means of self-defense).
      Secondly, as a light reconnaissance patrol aircraft.

      And the most interesting thing is that this is a very cheap machine for creating light repeater aircraft and AWACS aircraft based on it. Although it is clear that due to its size, serious equipment cannot be placed, but still this is a flying platform that can carry out such patrols for many hours).
  16. +1
    10 January 2024 10: 52
    And here again is Andryushenka’s article, to which I am again loyal! Because I once discussed how the Helios UAV can be used! And after the third glass of rum, my concept was born! This was facilitated by the statement of the developers that not only a radar, but also other equipment (for example, an optical-electronic system with a “TV”, a thermal imager and a laser rangefinder...) can be mounted on the Helios-RLD...) ... and even rockets! I can see how "Helios" works in pairs! The pair includes one "Helios-RLD" with a radar. (Moreover, the radar is preferably dual-mode; that is, "air-to-surface" and "air-to-air" modes... ""air" mode - surface "can be the main one; and the air-to-air mode can be additional for detecting and guiding missiles at taking off and low-flying air targets!) The second "Helios" in a pair is armed with missiles... It is desirable to have "multi-mode" missiles; i.e. "air-to-air" and "air-to-surface" in "one bottle"! In this case, "Helios" will be able to "hunt" both ground targets ("himars", "Caesars" ...), and take-off, low-flying airplanes, helicopters... Missiles, of course, should have as long a range as possible with “moderate” weight and dimensions!
  17. +1
    10 January 2024 12: 59
    I would like to add my twenty cents. Air defense UAVs should be on duty in pairs - one reconnaissance and target designation, the second mother UAV with a set of attack kamikaze UAVs (possibly (but not necessarily) without an engine). Having a significant height, one carries out reconnaissance and target designation (a laser path, in my opinion, would be optimal), the second (third, fourth, fifth...) delivers and drops relatively inexpensive ammunition in commercial quantities, which during planning catches up with and destroys both low-speed UAVs and ground targets .
  18. 0
    10 January 2024 13: 02
    Why not learn how to transmit data from a drone to radio command cheap air defense systems? The shell can hit 40 km, it has impressive ammunition, why does it need missiles with ARLGSN if it is not going to calculate data from its own radar, but from a flying one?
    In general, they decided to fight slow-moving UAVs with helicopters; they have cannons. The shells are cheap, and the speed of a helicopter is higher than that of a drone
    1. 0
      10 January 2024 19: 02
      You have trouble with your knowledge of geography. The earth is round, the range of the Pantsir against a UAV flying at 30 meters will be 20 kilometers, the UAV can be detected even closer, plus the reaction time, the probability of a miss. And there are no plans to shoot at maximum range. Plus, it is necessary to cover the firing zone. How many Shells does it take to close one city? Do you know what the cost of a one-hour helicopter flight is?
      1. -2
        10 January 2024 19: 23
        You have a problem with your head. The operating range of the shell is determined by the operating range of the flying radar associated with it on a drone, which is discussed in the article. That is 40 km. In total, every 30 km we place a shell, it doesn’t work out that much, a few dozen.
        Quote: Victor Sergeev
        How many Shells does it take to close one city?

        If the backlight is from a drone, then one or two
        Quote: Victor Sergeev
        Do you know what the cost of a one-hour helicopter flight is?

        Shells are expensive, helicopters are expensive, do you have a cheap alternative in store for your campaign?
  19. 0
    10 January 2024 13: 07
    Quote: Totvolk80
    This UAV, like the Orion, has no engines. They can't copy Rotax. We don’t need to “hang noodles on our ears.” There is no Orion UAV, they built a whole plant, but there are no UAVs. The Orion (Pacer) has one engine, and the Sirius has two. APD-115T is a crude engine on which they have been cutting money for years...

    https://newizv.ru/news/2021-01-13/tsap-tsarap-ne-poluchaetsya-pochemu-ne-letayut-rossiyskie-bespilotniki-317595

    This is the first problem, and the second is the lack of military closed satellite channels for exchanging information in real time with the ability to transmit images in high resolution. They lie to you all the time. For example: "Orlan-10" is controlled at a distance of 120 km in the blind, but the picture can be transmitted only 10 km. The question is, what is the combat radius of the Orlan-10? The answer is 10 km, not 120 km! The same nonsense about “Orions” and “Siriuses”. But the fact that they fly far and shoot a movie on a storage device that can be watched after landing does not change anything. So it turns out that reconnaissance can’t see anything further than binoculars. Here you go guys, chew some new candy...

    It’s not clear what they wanted to say, if everything you listed is not there, then there’s no point in doing anything? Katz suggests surrendering?
  20. 0
    10 January 2024 18: 30
    Against UAVs you need an I15 type aircraft, speed within 350 km/h, incredible maneuverability and 4 20 mm guns. With a normal sight, it will not be difficult for him to shoot down a UAV from a distance of 100 meters.
  21. +1
    13 January 2024 18: 03
    UAV planned for development by the Kronstadt group.... a combination of Helios-RLD UAVs and Sirius-PVO UAVs can fight more complex targets

    Since the “Kronstadt group”, then you don’t even have to fantasize - nothing will happen...
    But they keep telling us stories... :)
  22. 0
    10 February 2024 11: 53
    Why not consider the possibility of using piston fighters to patrol, detect and destroy UAVs using piston aircraft? Or for example YAK130? And special UAV hunters can work independently in this direction.
    1. 0
      11 March 2024 14: 25
      We have the SU-26M and Yak-52, you hang up the GSh-23-2, YakB, AM-23 or a couple of NSVs, and here you have an interception weapon!
  23. 0
    16 February 2024 10: 10
    Sirius and Helios exist only in theory so far. Why don't they use the Yak-130 for these purposes? We have produced more than 130 of them.
  24. 0
    26 February 2024 15: 56
    Not the absurd dreams of an author who has nothing real with current reality.
  25. 0
    27 February 2024 12: 04
    This is the first problem, and the second is the lack of military closed satellite channels for exchanging information in real time with the ability to transmit images in high resolution.

    1.What kind of fixation on satellites. Everything needs a companion. Without a satellite there is no communication, no navigation, no life on earth. I can’t imagine how people lived before satellites.
    Why can’t closed communication channels be made through an airplane, UAV, balloon, tower, elevation on the ground, or whatever?
    2. These UAV fighters, which everyone has been talking about for several decades, are one of the most logical methods of shooting down, first of all, AWACS aircraft at a very long range. A-50 and Il with radar are the best target for UAV fighters.
  26. +1
    1 March 2024 13: 07
    Note to the author:
    Igla and Verba MANPADS are not designed to engage UAVs and therefore their use for such purposes is neither effective nor advisable.
    A MANPADS costs about $100.000, and the price of an FPV-UAV starts at $500.
    In addition, it should be understood that MANPADS and air defense missiles are weapon carriers, and rocket carriers are superior to aircraft carriers in all respects.
    In other words, installing rocket launchers on aviation ones is a technical absurdity; a gross design error is an axiom since the time of Khrushchev’s army reform.
  27. 0
    11 March 2024 14: 22
    Start first with UAV AWACS and reconnaissance. Albeit with simple characteristics, in range (40-50 km), albeit with a slot antenna without AFAR. With it, it will be possible to intercept UAVs even with a helicopter or Yak-52.