ATGM from a drone: Fagot ATGM installed on the Perun-F UAV

60
ATGM from a drone: Fagot ATGM installed on the Perun-F UAV

The high intensity of hostilities in the zone of the Russian Special Military Operation (SVO) in Ukraine has led to the emergence of a huge number of new technical solutions, options for refinement and/or modernization of new and long-outdated weapons, as well as tactics for their use.

As we have said many times, one of the beneficiaries of this war is unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which are actively used by both sides of the conflict. There are many UAVs - at the top of the power chain are heavy jet UAVs, followed by medium-altitude MALE-class UAVs, then small-sized aircraft and quadcopter (octacopter/hexacopter) UAVs, as well as long-range kamikaze and FPV UAVs.drones-kamikaze. However, this list is far from complete.



Today we will talk about small-sized quadcopter UAVs (octacopter/hexacopter type), which are used on the line of combat contact (LCC) or near it, or more precisely, about an interesting combination implemented by Russian military personnel - the installation of an anti-tank missile system (ATGM) on a quadrocopter UAV.

"Bassoon" plus "Perun-F"


At the end of January this year, a video appeared on Russian Telegram channels showing the Perun-F UAV with a 9K111 Fagot ATGM installed on it.

The specified ATGM 9K111 “Fagot” was developed in the Tula Instrument Design Bureau and adopted by the Soviet Army back in 1970; it includes the 9P135 launcher (PU) and the 9M111 anti-tank guided missile (ATGM). The ATGM is aimed at the target by wire in a semi-automatic mode - the operator must hold the crosshairs of the sight throughout the entire flight of the ATGM to the target. The maximum firing range of the basic 9M111 ATGM is 2 meters. The 000P9M launcher can be used with the 135M9 “Konkurs” and 113M9M “Konkurs-M” ATGMs with a maximum firing range of up to 113 meters.


ATGM 9K111 "Bassoon". Image by Mike1979 Russia

The Perun-F quadrocopter UAV has dimensions of about 1,7 meters, it is capable of rising to a height of up to 3 kilometers, while its range of action is about 20–30 kilometers. The carrying capacity of the Perun-F UAV reaches 150 kilograms, built-in sensors monitor the center of gravity of the UAV with cargo, and the communication system provides control at a distance of up to 55 kilometers.

The video posted on the Internet shows how the Perun-F UAV fires from the Fagot ATGM, both while in the air and when landing on the surface - judging by open data, this was implemented for the first time in the world.


The Perun-F UAV fires from the Fagot ATGM while in the air

The question is, is all this necessary? After all the concept of UAVs is such that they themselves, to some extent, should serve as consumables, of course, only if at a certain point in time their developers did not “turn in the wrong direction”.

In reality, everything is much more complicated.

Cost-effectiveness


It’s one thing when a UAV is initially developed and produced for short-term use, which primarily applies to kamikaze UAVs, including their most common and widespread subtype - FPV drones. Another thing is when a UAV is developed as reusable, but in fact on the battlefield it becomes disposable.

For example, we can hit an enemy with an FPV drone; for 10 opponents we will need (conditionally) 10 FPV drones. We can also hit 10 enemies by dropping unguided munitions from a UAV bomber. So, if a UAV-bomber can hit only 9 opponents before being shot down, while it will cost more than 9 FPV drones, then the “cost-effectiveness” criterion clearly does not work in its favor.

The fact that the effectiveness of counter-UAV measures will only increase is certain. We have previously discussed the prospects for the development of counter-UAV means in the material “Drones over the trenches: countering reconnaissance and adjustment quadcopters on the front line”, "Third Person Warfare: Drones vs. Drones" и “From a gun to a sparrow: will micro-UAVs return the shotgun to the battlefield”.

By the way, a number of the considered methods of combating UAVs are already quite successfully used in the Northern Military District zone, for example, several episodes of destroying UAVs with sniper rifles were published on the Lobaev Z Telegram channel.


A sniper from the 76th Airborne Assault Division of the Airborne Forces with the call sign “Executioner” shot down two hexacopters (“Baba Yaga”) of the Ukrainian Armed Forces with a Lobaev Arms TSVL-8 M4 “Antimatter” rifle. Image: komdiv_76

Footage of a Russian fighter destroying a Ukrainian FPV drone with a shotgun also appeared on the Internet.


Drone in the air (highlighted in green), shot, drone shot down (highlighted in red)

From time to time, information also surfaces about the defeat of drones with the help of drones, that is, the era of air battles between UAVs has actually begun.

And finally, don’t forget about laser weapons, which, despite the pessimism of skeptics, continue to develop rapidly, it is possible that we will even see use of laser air defense (air defense) systems in the air defense zone.

All of the above suggests that the only thing that will allow in the future To maintain the effectiveness of such a type of weapon as kamikaze UAVs is to produce them in millions of units per year and use them in thousands in one strike.

But in war, not only kamikaze UAVs are required, but also reconnaissance UAVs, spotter UAVs, relay UAVs, and many others, including attack UAVs, which are now actually bomber UAVs that drop unguided ammunition on the enemy. So, in terms of UAV-bombers, in the near future there may come a time when their life on the battlefield will be too short to justify their existence from the point of view of the cost-effectiveness criterion.

Accordingly, they will have to go through the same evolution as combat aircraft/helicopters, that is, learn to use high-precision weapon from a safe distance. But how many conversations there were during the Syrian campaign that the Russian aviation a lot of precision weapons are not required - we have Hephaestus, so where are all these “experts” now?

The author is convinced that medium-altitude aircraft-type UAVs of the MALE class have nothing to do on the battlefield with unguided ammunition; using them as bombers means simply stupidly disposing of them for the joy of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. It is necessary either to equip reusable UAVs with precision-guided ammunition, or to use them as carriers for kamikaze UAVs, as we previously discussed in the material “Destruction with confirmation: the use of Lancet-3 kamikaze UAVs from Orion carrier UAVs will make it possible to demonstratively destroy Ukrainian Patriot air defense systems and HIMARS MLRS”.


A combination of a medium-sized Orion-type UAV and a Lancet-type kamikaze UAV could provide search and destruction with confirmation of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) and artillery installations with which the enemy attacks civilians

Goals and tactics of application


The goals and tasks that a UAV equipped with an ATGM can accomplish are quite broad. First of all, ground units at the squad or platoon level essentially receive their own attack aircraft - there is no need to call for air support, it is enough to raise a “bird” into the air and independently destroy enemy armored vehicles.

The significant flight range of the Perun-F type UAV makes it possible to hunt enemy armored vehicles, artillery, missile launchers and air defense systems in the near rear. At the same time, if Meshes also help in some way from FPV drones, then they have much less chance of protecting against ATGMs. In addition, the flight range of the ATGM is summed up with the range of the carrier UAV.

The Perun-F UAV in question can also operate from an ambush, moving in advance to a convenient point with a good view and waiting for enemy armored vehicles, while with the engines turned off and cooled down, it will be poorly visible in thermal imagers (until the ATGM flies to the target) .


UAV "Perun-F" fires from the surface

And, of course, using UAVs of the Perun-F type can ensure the disruption of the enemy’s offensive if he breaks through the defense lines, even without support provided by combat helicopters.

This is only a small part of the capabilities of combat vehicles of this type; there is no doubt that our fighters in the Northern Military District zone will find many more options for using UAVs with ATGMs.

Development prospects


The Fagot ATGM installed on the Perun-F UAV is a fairly “ancient” complex; there are much more modern and effective models, their use will significantly increase the effectiveness of the UAV plus ATGM combination, and new combat tactics using just such weapons will appear.

The creators of the Perun-F UAV with the Fagot ATGM definitely had to solve a number of technical problems related to the transmission of video images from the optical guidance system of the ATGM, as well as ensuring target tracking by the sighting device throughout the ATGM flight. There is no doubt that in the future, specialized models of high-precision weapons will also be developed, created specifically for use with UAVs of various types; more precisely, such products already exist and are being developed.

Installing an ATGM is far from the only option - many other types of weapons can potentially be installed on UAVs, for example, man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS). In this configuration, an air defense UAV can turn into a formidable combat vehicle - a hunter of enemy planes and helicopters. The ability to rise higher minimizes the enemy's chances of breaking through to the target at low altitudes.

It is quite effective and can already be installed on UAVs and small arms, that is, turning the UAV into a mobile automated firing point (AOT). Such a UAV-AOT can secretly move behind enemy lines, land somewhere on a roof or in another convenient place, inaccessible to humans, go into energy saving mode and wait for hours for a command to open fire, for example, when reinforcements try to approach the enemy.

The installation of high-precision small arms (sniper systems) looks especially promising; Lobaev Arms seems to be doing something similar, but this is not certain. By the way, when working from an ambush with a UAV, silent rifles such as Vintorez, Val, 9A91 can also perform well, especially in battles in populated areas.

Conclusions


The appearance of the Perun-F UAV with the Fagot ATGM is a natural, logical direction in the development of this type of weapon. This is just the beginning of a process that will later spread to most UAVs of a certain size, weight and price category.

Of course, UAV bombers with unguided munitions will not disappear today or tomorrow - for now they are very useful, but that moment will definitely come.
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    25 February 2024 05: 36

    The Perun-F quadrocopter UAV has dimensions of about 1,7 meters, it is capable of rising to a height of up to 3 kilometers, while its range of action is about 20–30 kilometers. The carrying capacity of the Perun-F UAV reaches 150 kilograms...
    A serious machine, such a one is already capable of transporting a person, especially a wounded one, from the battlefield in absolute off-road conditions, not to mention the numerous options for other options for purely military use.
    1. -6
      25 February 2024 07: 08
      This thing can be used to blow up pontoon crossings and overpasses. 100-150kg under the belly is a 250kg bomb. Yes, and a fortified area too, high-rise buildings, workshops
      1. +1
        25 February 2024 07: 15
        Quote: Tlauicol
        This thing can be used to blow up pontoon crossings and overpasses. 100-150kg under the belly..
        I don’t understand - with “such a thing”, it would probably be more economical to hang a bomb, but in this case it is advisable to increase the speed, otherwise it is too likely that they will be shot down.
        1. +1
          25 February 2024 07: 29
          One aircraft flight will cost more than this drone. Not counting the umpk bomb.
          They won't shoot you down at night
          1. 0
            25 February 2024 07: 35
            Quote: Tlauicol
            One aircraft flight will cost more than this drone. ..
            They won't shoot you down at night
            But why use such an expensive toy like this quadric so irrationally? It is much cheaper to use specialized winged vehicles in such cases, the speed is higher (less likely to be shot down), and the cost is many times cheaper, and they already exist, just release them!
            And quadrics have a unique ability to return; these are clearly reusable devices, and in this sense, their use on the battlefield in the sum of their parameters is much cheaper than disposable aircraft.
            1. 0
              25 February 2024 07: 48
              Why is this so? Cheaper than a flight from umpk. And, if you meant Geranium, then it costs much more. Goooooooood. And her tasks are not front line.
              1. 0
                25 February 2024 08: 02
                Quote: Tlauicol
                .. Cheaper than a flight from umpk. Oh, if you meant Geranium, then it costs much more. Goooooooood.
                Everything needs to be taken into account, not the price but the own cost of production; unfortunately, these values ​​often do not converge significantly. "Geranium" is just one of the options, it is quite possible that it is not the most optimal and cheapest.
            2. +2
              25 February 2024 17: 44
              Quote: venaya
              It is much cheaper to use specialized winged vehicles in such cases, the speed is higher (less likely to be shot down), and the cost is many times cheaper, and they already exist, just release them!

              Which ones? Which ones don't exist? 150 kilograms of load are Orions, which are almost invisible at the fronts; apparently they do a couple of things a month.
              And the copter can fly at an altitude of 50 m, no air defense will see
              1. 0
                27 February 2024 08: 49
                Quote from alexoff
                the copter can fly at an altitude of 50 m, no air defense will see it
                I didn’t understand something here. The quadcopter can actually fly at an altitude of 50 meters. But for some reason, an already winged machine is not able to fly at even lower altitudes, because with wings, controllability at low altitudes is much higher, perhaps even by an order of magnitude. But in terms of flight speed, there is nothing to compare; with the same engine power, the speed and, accordingly, the flight range are several times higher, and it is naturally much more difficult to shoot down such drones. But as for the cost, a calculation should be made here; I myself am very surprised by the sharp increase in production costs with an increase in the weight of the aircraft. I think that the real cost should increase in proportion to the weight of both the payload and the aircraft itself, and maybe even to a lesser extent. Think about what is causing such a sharp increase in prices? After all, this should not normally happen...
                1. 0
                  27 February 2024 10: 35
                  Quote: venaya
                  But for some reason, an already winged machine is not able to fly at even lower altitudes, because with wings, controllability at low altitudes is much higher, perhaps even by an order of magnitude.

                  for the reason that the speed of the winged car is high, like that of a car pushing full speed on the highway - it will quickly knock down some pole, pipe, power line, tree or house. Accordingly, the dimensions are larger than those of a copter, and maneuverability is worse.
                  Quote: venaya
                  But as for the cost, a calculation should be made here; I myself am very surprised by the sharp increase in production costs with an increase in the weight of the aircraft.

                  So it's not a matter of mass. This Perun, as stated, costs 20-30 thousand bucks, lifts a hundred kilos into the air. But in general, the Cornet anti-tank missile system costs about the same. And the lancet costs about the same. Because the Chinese got confused and created a line for the mass production of such things, and they buy this mass and the Chinese remain in the black. Orlan-10, which is a designer from Ali Express, costs about a hundred thousand bucks, because - well, why not? According to open documents, bumblebees simply bought 300 thousand rubles for a shaitan pipe, this is the price of several iPhones, why does a disposable almost grenade launcher cost so much? Because the director of a military plant wants to eat well.
          2. 0
            25 February 2024 07: 37
            Quote: venaya
            "such a thing", it would probably be more economical to hang a bomb

            You can use a grenade launcher to attack a target from a distance.
            With the bomb you need to fly over the target.
            Don is not small, there is a high probability that they will be able to shoot him down even with machine guns.
            From a distance, only a machine gun is dangerous, but you still need to have time to notice the drone itself.
            In general, Belarusians did this back in 2018
            https://topwar.ru/142628-belorusskie-voennye-prodemonstrirovali-letayuschiy-granatomet.html?ysclid=lt10yic3nw52733659
            1. 0
              25 February 2024 07: 58
              Quote: Shurik70
              With the bomb you need to fly over the target.
              What kind of bomb is this, without UMPC? Bombs without wings should be abandoned altogether, and the sooner the better. And the use of anti-tank systems is simply one of the options, the equivalent of winged bombs, and even with an engine. It’s just that in view of the already existing mass production of anti-tank systems, in total it turns out that their use is cheaper, and in the future, of course, it is desirable to use specialized winged bombs, and even with their own cheap shifter.
              1. KCA
                -1
                25 February 2024 08: 38
                They loaded 95 FAB-160s with UMPC into the TU-80MS or TU-500, but who will control them? Or is it better to dump these 60 pieces at once? Every vegetable has its own fruit, every task has its own means.
                1. 0
                  25 February 2024 08: 44
                  Quote: KCA
                  They loaded 95 FAB-160s with UMPC into the TU-80MS or TU-500, but who will control them? ..
                  In this case, you may need as many as 60 drone operators... It’s a bit of an expensive idea, not to mention the use of Tu-95MS strategists or the even more expensive Tu-160. It is always advisable to use the least expensive ammunition delivery options.
                  1. KCA
                    -3
                    25 February 2024 10: 23
                    So they use one FAB from Sushki, flood the arrays, you need at least something to eat tactical SU-34 and long-range TU-22M3, IL-2 they scattered hundreds of thousands of PTAB per raid, no sight, by eye, but the tanks were burning, now with TU -95 to dump over an area under 20 PTAB, it won’t seem too small
                    1. +1
                      25 February 2024 10: 28
                      Quote: KCA
                      Now, dumping an area of ​​95 PTABs from a TU-20 won’t seem like much
                      First of all "little will not seem"To the Tu-95 itself, the machine is even very expensive!
                      Although if you really create an extremely cheap version of the Tu-95, and even in an unmanned version, then yes, there would really be an effect. But all this is very, very unlikely...
                    2. +1
                      26 February 2024 16: 46
                      dumping over an area of ​​20 PTAB, it won’t seem like enough

                      PTAB is against dense columns of armored vehicles. But there is no such thing now. A rare tank fires from closed positions, or a rare infantry fighting vehicle or armored personnel carrier drops troops and leaves before the FPVs attack. Yes
                2. +3
                  25 February 2024 15: 15
                  Nobody controls FAB-500 with UMPC. There is an INS and a satellite receiver, a flight to a point with given coordinates (where they are asked is another question) and along a given profile. But for the INS to work, a reference point is needed during launch; the UMPC receives it from the aircraft. Therefore, the same Su-34 can take no more than 6 FAB-500s with UMPC - other holders, apparently, cannot transmit data from on board (it can take up to 500 regular FAB-16s).
                  And in order to “load” several dozen bombs into a Tu-95 or Tu-160, it is necessary to remodel the bomb bay of the aircraft and turn it from a strategist into a front-line bomber - a so-so idea.
                  1. KCA
                    0
                    25 February 2024 15: 46
                    What's the idea? In the shaggy years there was an option to use TU-95 and TU-160 as bombers, I don’t know about 160, but 95 was actually used, back in Syria
                    1. +2
                      25 February 2024 16: 17
                      Tu-95MS (MSM) are missile-carrying aircraft, there are no others now. In the bomb bay there is a revolver installation for strategic missiles; nothing else can be placed there. The MSM version had 8 pylons under the wing for missile suspension, each weighing more than 2 tons. You can probably hang something other than rockets on these pylons. The Tu-160 has only 2 revolving missile launchers in the bomb bay; nothing can be placed except missiles.
                      1. +2
                        25 February 2024 16: 27
                        However, I'm probably wrong. There are references to the possible placement of bombs, including KAB-1500 (possibly on the same revolver holders).
                        But is it too much to drive the Tu-160 to the front line?
                3. 0
                  25 February 2024 17: 46
                  Quote: KCA
                  Loaded 95 FAB-160 with UMPC into TU-80MS or TU-500

                  Do you think that UMPC produces hundreds of them a day that ordinary aircraft do not have time to drop them?
              2. +1
                25 February 2024 17: 55
                What kind of bomb is this, without UMPC?
                Vyacheslav, in order for a bomb with UMPC to fly at least 40 km, it is thrown from a height of 10-11 km at transonic speed. Look how the Su-34 does this, there was footage on the internet.
            2. +2
              25 February 2024 08: 21
              Well, using the “Bassoon” on a drone is a futile exercise! This is not where the men started! We need specialized homing missiles!
              1. +1
                25 February 2024 08: 26
                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                We need specialized homing missiles!
                That’s why I’m writing about this, it’s just that they haven’t been made yet; it’s quite possible to use a similar surrogate. It happens that time is more valuable than money, the use of what is already available is more rational than dreams of quickly launching into production more optimal weapons for today.
              2. 0
                25 February 2024 17: 37
                Drone from Ali-express, ATGM available. A homing missile will probably cost as much as ten of these drones, and it will take ten years to develop it
    2. 0
      25 February 2024 16: 54
      Quote: venaya
      A serious machine, such a one is already capable of transporting a person, especially a wounded one, from the battlefield in absolute off-road conditions, not to mention the numerous options for other options for purely military use.
      This is how it was tested.
      Something about Perun:
      multifunctional unmanned aerial system (MBPLK) “Perun-F”, can deliver cargo by air weighing up to 150 kg, carry out aerial photography and reconnaissance of the area, perform search and rescue operations, including the evacuation of soldiers from the battlefield. The estimated cost of the Perun-F quadcopter is 20-25 thousand dollars. The quadcopter is currently being tested. According to test results:
      - “Perun-F” delivered a load weighing 70 kg at a height of 10 m and a distance of 1 km. In another test, the device delivered a fighter weighing 60 kg at a height of 2 m and at a distance of 20 m, and also evacuated a wounded man weighing 60 kg, at a height of 10 m and at a distance of 500 m.
      1. +1
        26 February 2024 13: 58
        It looks like rubbing in another bullshit and cutting. At the stated 150kg, are they tested with a load of 70 and 60kg? It’s interesting that they imagine the fighter’s weight))) Is he 60kg with equipment?))) Only those with dystrophy, a teenager or a girl are suitable for this weight. It looks like there are just another “artists” there with their own parallel reality.
  2. -4
    25 February 2024 06: 33
    The capabilities of UAVs are breathtaking...for example, if jet engines are installed on quadcopters, the combat load and equipment will increase significantly, and if they are also equipped with automatic target acquisition and reconnaissance systems, it is difficult to say how our enemy in the person of NATO and the Ukronazis will fight off such birds.
    The main thing in the development of UAVs is not to stand still, not to become complacent... to come up with new and new ways of using and equipping them.
    1. +5
      25 February 2024 06: 50
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      If you install jet engines on quadcopters, the combat load and equipment will increase significantly..
      How and at the expense of which the combat load can increase? A quadcopter is still a propeller-driven machine, and attaching additional jets to it is absolutely pointless.
    2. +6
      25 February 2024 08: 07
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      if you install jet engines on quadcopters

      That is, you propose to attach grandfather’s “dignity” to the “grandmother”, being sure that you will get a real “grandfather”?! belay fool You know...I also like to go “crazy” sometimes, but I never thought of jet engines on a quadcopter(!)! In view of the complete futility of such an “idea” at the present time!
      1. 0
        25 February 2024 14: 00
        There are videos on YouTube of flights of jet platforms on which one person weighing 60-70 kg makes a pretzel in the air.
        Imagine if instead of a person they carry 50 kg of powerful explosives... this is already serious.
        1. +2
          26 February 2024 13: 56
          There are videos on YouTube of flights of jet platforms on which one person weighing 60-70 kg makes a pretzel in the air.

          That’s exactly what pretzels are, and they are made not by a platform, but by a person.
          Have you ever thought why there are no jet helicopters?
          1. 0
            26 February 2024 22: 43
            There may not be any jet ones, but the Americans just shut down the program for a helicopter with a pusher propeller at the back, spending a lot of money. We wanted it to fly quickly. But they closed it down not because it didn’t work out. The standards have been tested.
            1. 0
              27 February 2024 14: 34
              There may not be any jet ones, but the Americans just shut down the program for a helicopter with a pusher propeller at the back, spending a lot of money.

              What does this have to do with it? We are discussing the idea of ​​a quadcopter with a jet engine to increase speed.
              1. 0
                28 February 2024 12: 53
                What is the fundamental difference between what kind of engine is in the tail of the helicopter? Jet or turboprop?
  3. +1
    25 February 2024 06: 59
    Everything is going to the point that drones seem to soon be comparable to combat aircraft, most likely these are also needed, but everything was conceived as a fairly cheap airborne weapon, effective at a certain distance and not heavy weapons, or as just a one-time cheap kamikaze
  4. +4
    25 February 2024 07: 50
    The situation with aircraft and UAVs is reminiscent of the situation with battleships and submarines. Countries that do not have the funds to develop air forces can create relatively cheap drone aircraft and quickly catch up with countries with powerful air forces, such as the United States. request Please keep in mind that this is just the beginning... feel
    1. +4
      25 February 2024 07: 58
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      The situation with aircraft and UAVs is reminiscent of the situation with battleships and submarines

      And in the end, the submarines rose to the occasion, and the battleships faded into obscurity...
      1. +1
        26 February 2024 16: 51
        battleships went into obscurity

        Only their aircraft carrier groups won. And submarines are mainly against civilian transport, until normal security has been established. And when the convoy was normally covered by destroyers, not to mention aviation, the submarine’s chances were minimal.
  5. +2
    25 February 2024 08: 00
    You need to install a solar panel on such a quadric and send it into an ambush behind Nazi lines. You can wait for a good “fat” target on a building or hillock. The main thing is that the connection is not jammed. I hope our connections will come up with a compact directional antenna such as a phased array and a repeater.
    1. +4
      25 February 2024 08: 25
      Ukrainians have already come up with this idea a long time ago.
      The kamikaze drone flies to a certain point, lands on the ground and goes into standby mode.
      Equipped with an electronic fuse board (which can serve as a detector). When the target approaches, the system is activated and it remains 100-50 meters to fly to the target.
      The battery can last up to a month in this mode.
  6. +4
    25 February 2024 08: 01
    Here you need to drag a bunch of iron into the air. Temporary solution. I think disposable plastic launchers will appear soon, or the rocket launch will be after the reset.
    1. +1
      25 February 2024 08: 26
      There is also no homing head (. It has long been necessary to switch to homing missiles so that an operator is not needed to fine-tune the missile to the target.
  7. +3
    25 February 2024 08: 20
    Only now we have come to such a clever idea - to connect an ATGM with a drone. But the Belarusians in their “Quad-1600” and “Loitering Pipe” came to this idea a little earlier - already in 2018, by attaching 1-2 pipes to a relatively small quadric from RPG-28. Very effective, the range is a little shorter, but sufficient (500-600m). And most importantly, it’s quite cheap and relatively quiet. Such devices are needed on the LBS, but somehow they are not visible. And what is being proposed is another proposed combination of a large agrodrone and... a sea of ​​options. The idea is excellent, but why did they add an ATGM from the 70s (both Fagot and Competition)? Newer ones, I understand, are not available for Aerotekhnologiya LLC, or they didn’t get them? Well, to put it mildly, they are noisy. It would be nice to learn how to make these agrodrones ourselves (and buy them in China from Russia they are quite difficult, unlike the country of U.). Where is the purely Russian “Baba Yaga” at last? I’m giving a tip for the same Aerotechnology - in our beloved China, the first commercial flying vehicles are being prepared for release this year. You buy them through a long network of intermediaries (alas, you have to get used to this), install a cannon, a machine gun (those, fortunately, are your own), install a mechanic-driver, commander and gunner-operator, load shells - and go “Starship Troopers” against the Enemy You are preparing a place in your pocket for the State Prize. So shall we win?
    1. 0
      26 February 2024 16: 54
      But why did they add anti-tank systems from the 70s (either Bassoon or Competition)?

      They have wired guidance. Accordingly, they are resistant to any electronic warfare. And the drone, since it is large, can also be provided with stable communication via a satellite or repeater.
  8. Tim
    0
    25 February 2024 10: 02
    Our soldiers will need it!
  9. +2
    25 February 2024 10: 35
    In addition, information about the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ new move in the drone war has been confirmed: now the enemy uses agricultural multicopters (“Baba Yaga”) as an aerial carrier of FPV drones and a repeater. Which, together with repeaters on enemy aircraft-type UAVs, increases the destruction distance from 25 to 50 km.

    TG channel Two majors, 25.02.2024/XNUMX/XNUMX
  10. 0
    25 February 2024 12: 36
    Everything goes by trial and error, the more the better, experience will weed out the unnecessary, it won’t work any other way. At one time, it was proposed at the initial stage, in order to maintain the control position, and this is essentially an advanced aircraft controller, to remove the control of all kinds of drones from the operator - to make it remote in the form of a free-standing tripod or a mobile remote-controlled ground robot repeater. Unfortunately, I haven't noticed anything like this yet. Possibly used...
  11. +3
    25 February 2024 12: 53
    I am the only one tormented by vague doubts. How does Bassoon work? Semi-automatic, sort of? You need to keep the mark on the target. The equipment generates commands for the tracer. But “what the goal is” is decided by the operator. Will the Perun stabilization system provide sufficient accuracy so that the missile does not “lose its target” during the entire flight of the rocket?
    Will additional stabilization be needed?
  12. 0
    25 February 2024 13: 42
    Quote: Author
    ...we have already been said several times, one of beneficiaries of this war were unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)

    belay
    We, Karl. Not otherwise collective intelligence or AI(I'll be back).)))
    The mechanism cannot be a beneficiary:
    [< fr. benefit profit; benefit]
    BENEFICIARY
    an artist (or theater employee) in whose favor or honor a benefit performance was held.
    It’s a common thing when you hear a ringing in Bird Newspeak, but you don’t know where it is...
    It’s time to finally start respecting our native Russian language, this is the second year of the lightning-fast SVO, after all.
  13. 0
    25 February 2024 14: 19
    Quote: Author
    The Perun-F UAV in question can also operate from an ambush, having advanced to a convenient point in advance

    It is also possible to use for mining when armor is detected, for example KPTM-4, like VSM-2.
  14. +5
    25 February 2024 15: 47
    Has anyone considered the idea of ​​a disposable kamikaze drone whose body is built around a cumulative, tandem charge?
    Not like now, a drone to which a grenade/shell/mine is almost taped to the outer skin. And then they throw off or push. And literally a cumulative charge AROUND which all systems are located.
    Let's assume the body is in the form of a cylinder. Inside of which, in the central part, the shaped charge itself is located. In the front part of the case (in front of the charge) there is a control equipment unit with a camera. To be cheap and widespread, the camera will be installed stationary looking forward along the course of movement, but a fish-eye lens will simply be placed in front of it to increase the field of view (to compensate for the lack of camera rotation). At the rear of the cylinder, BEHIND the charge, is the battery pack and pusher type motor. You can attach cross-shaped wings to the body itself (as on the Lancet), or one classic wing with a pair of stabilizers.
    The kamikaze drone itself will have double protection against detonation.
    The first is a mechanical pin, which I remove before launching the drone.
    The second is a mechanical fuse, part of a contact fuse. The second is needed so that the operator can launch the drone safely for his own people and not injure his own people if the drone falls. Since the second mechanical block, by default, does not allow the shaped charge to work. But as soon as the operator on the camera sees a vehicle confirmed as an enemy vehicle, he presses one button to remove the second fuse, after which the drone, in the event of a collision with a target (or with an obstacle, if the operator missed), initiates a shaped charge.
    If the decision is made to return the drone, then the operator simply does not press the command to remove the second “lock”, which is why the drone, having flown to its own, can be safely returned. After returning, you can even return a regular pin to the slot for safe storage for next time.
    1. +3
      25 February 2024 22: 43
      So the simplified "Lancet" is built on this principle as a whole...
  15. 0
    25 February 2024 20: 19
    and if the wire doesn’t burn out... we need to get rid of it somehow
  16. 0
    26 February 2024 01: 08
    What is the problem with friendly fire when the drone returns?
    Will a soldier in the trenches be able to determine quickly enough whether it is his own drone or whether he is under attack?
  17. TIR
    0
    26 February 2024 02: 40
    I think it’s easier to create a UAV with 220 volt engines. Power supply via cable. No batteries, a 1 kW station below on the ground. A heavy drone hangs above her in hover mode with Bassoon. Raise if equipment is noticed approaching. But all this is of course half measures. We need to retire the equipment much further. Coming soon
    1. +1
      26 February 2024 16: 58
      create a UAV with 220 volt engines. Power supply via cable.

      This version of a wired drone was being developed for Armata. Sort of a spotter. request
      But due to the rapid development of conventional UAVs, they abandoned it. Now even ordinary penny PDFs with a repeater work 20 km from the LBS.
  18. 0
    4 March 2024 00: 15
    An example of an alternative to helicopters
  19. 0
    11 March 2024 19: 48
    The appearance of the Perun-F UAV with the Fagot ATGM is a natural, logical direction in the development of this type of weapon.

    Most likely unnatural. Some kind of Frankenstein. Piling an ATGM bassoon with a spool of fiber optic cable onto a quadcopter is, of course, something, and it’s clearly due to the lack of small-sized guided missiles and bombs for UAVs. But if they are not there, then at least the Vikhr or Ataka ATGM missile was attached instead of this bassoon. At least the wire didn’t dangle and get on the propeller blades and pull the drone off course. And in addition to the pipe, carrying a heavy and bulky bassoon control and guidance unit is quite a task. We already had an example of installing a cornet on an Orion UAV. And now this initiative has died out, they have stopped writing and talking about it. It seems that the authors realized that this, to put it mildly, is not entirely advisable. It is still necessary to create specialized missiles and bombs for attack drones, as is done all over the world.