Testing of anti-FPV drones on the YouTube channel “Large Caliber Trouble” and an anti-drone turret from Lobaev Z

An FPV drone shot down with a shotgun. Still from the YouTube channel “Large Caliber Trouble” video

The reason that prompted the author to return again to the topic of using shotguns for protection against FPV-drones in the area of ​​the Russian Special Military Operation (SVO) in Ukraine, there is an ever-increasing number of messages from military officers and specialized Internet resources about the continuously increasing number of attacks carried out by the enemy using FRU drones.

Less than a month ago we already talked about this in the material 50 shotguns per year for the Russian army. Why the problem of FPV drones-kamikazes needs to be solved now, but given that the parity or even superiority of the enemy in the number of FPV drones used can largely nullify the superiority of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation (RF Armed Forces) in other types of weapons, we are returning to this topic again.

On the one hand, it seems that something is being done in this direction, but many of the measures taken raise questions. For example, being developed interceptor drones, hitting enemy unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) using a weapon attached to them weapons or by direct impact (kamikaze), are suitable for destroying reconnaissance UAVs moving slowly or hovering over the battlefield, as well as for destroying Baba Yaga-type UAV bombers, but they are unlikely to be effective against FPV drones.

At the beginning of April (2.04.2024/XNUMX/XNUMX), the YouTube channel “Large-Caliber Trouble” published the material “So that it doesn’t kill you | We conduct experiments on kamikazes | Net launcher, pump gun, anti-drone gun”, where tests of various means to counter FPV drones were carried out; today we will first of all talk about them.

Large-caliber commotion

Within the framework of the topic under consideration, the channel's presenter tried such countermeasures as a Kalashnikov assault rifle, a net thrower, an anti-drone gun - a portable, directed electronic warfare device (EW) and a 12-gauge smooth-bore pump-action shotgun. Of course, the FPV drone was used without ammunition.

The Kalashnikov assault rifle was tested first; first, two attempts were made to shoot down an attacking FPV drone with single shots, then with burst fire. In all cases, it was not possible to hit the FRU drone. Of course, this does not mean that it is impossible to shoot down an FPV drone with standard small arms, but, most likely, the chances will be low - it’s not for nothing that they don’t shoot ducks with machine guns.

At the same time, with regard to low-speed and hovering drones, the results can be much better; we talked about the use of machine guns and even sniper rifles for this purpose in the material Drones over the trenches: countering reconnaissance quadrocopters and adjustments on the front line, and many of the proposed options for combating reconnaissance UAVs and UAV-bombers have confirmed their performance in the northwestern military zone; there are photos and videos confirming the downing of these UAVs, both with the help of standard automatic weapons and with the help of sniper rifles.

And so the Ukrainian Armed Forces (AFU) are trying to fight our kamikaze UAVs. Image of the Telegram channel “Military Informant”

The presenter then fired at the incoming FPV drone using a pyrotechnic net thrower. The results are ambiguous: on the one hand, the drone was shot down, on the other hand, it was shot down almost close to the defender, that is, in the event of an explosion of ammunition, which in real conditions would have been carried by an FPV drone, the defender could have been wounded or even killed. The net thrower is single-shot - there will be no second chance, but it costs comparable to the cost of smooth-bore or rifled models of domestic civilian small arms.

Shooting from a net launcher – an FPV drone caught in the net is highlighted in red. Still from the YouTube channel “Large Caliber Trouble” video

The net thrower was followed by an anti-drone electronic warfare weapon of an unknown manufacturer. What can I say, the results are, to put it mildly, disappointing. In none of the scenarios for using an FPV drone, close to real ones, was it possible to exert any influence on it using an anti-drone electronic warfare weapon. Only when the drone hovered a few meters from the leader with an anti-drone gun was it possible to “land” it.

Of course, in combat conditions such results are categorically unacceptable and will lead to the death of a fighter, while anti-drone guns cost about three hundred thousand rubles.

Top frame – the FPV drone does not respond to the anti-drone gun, bottom frame – the FPV drone is “shot down”, everyone can estimate the distance for themselves. Stills from the YouTube channel “Large Caliber Trouble” video

If you believe the information published on the Telegram channel “OVOD | Tula - the developer and manufacturer of the FPV drones of the same name "Gadfly", then the creators of FPV drones will always be one step ahead of the developers of electronic warfare equipment, since they only respond to the conditions that FPV drones “put forward”, in addition to the operation of electronic warfare equipment a number of restrictions are imposed, for example, they need to interfere with the operation of enemy FPV drones, but not interfere with the operation of their own FPV drones.

The newest Russian T-90M Proryv tank, equipped with anti-drone visors and standard electronic warfare equipment with 8 antennas at once, was nevertheless hit by an enemy FPV drone. Image of the Telegram channel “Military Informant”

The above does not indicate the uselessness of electronic warfare systems, but still, apparently, this is rather a group, collective, rather than an individual means of covering against FPV drones. It’s one thing to systematically use electronic warfare to cover platoons and squads, another thing is to try to use anti-drone guns as a weapon of last chance to protect soldiers from attacks by FRU drones.

And finally, the last test method against FPV drones was a 12-gauge smoothbore shotgun. The result fully met expectations - the attacking FPV drone was shot down with the very first shot, the propellers and wiring were damaged, and the engines were torn off. Moreover, the shooting was carried out with buckshot, which, although it has a high destructive power, does not contain so many damaging elements.

Let’s just say that in skeet sporting they don’t shoot with buckshot, and we can assume that when shooting with 0/00/000/0000 shot, the destructive effect will remain at a sufficient level, and the probability of defeat will increase even more, however, the final choice of the optimal ammunition can only be based on results of comparative practical shooting specifically against real FPV drones.

Buckshot caused fatal damage to the FPV drone. Still from the YouTube channel “Large Caliber Trouble” video

Comparative tests of anti-drone weapons conducted by the YouTube channel “Large-Caliber Trouble” clearly show the advantages of using smooth-bore shotguns to combat FRU drones.

For the most part, 12-gauge smoothbore shotguns, when firing shotgun or buckshot, have an effective range of about 30–50 meters (12/70 and 12/76 Magnum cartridges), then the accuracy of the scree and the destructive power of the striking elements decrease. It can be assumed that when working against FRU drones, the effective firing range from a shotgun will be even less – about 10–20 meters.

The problem is that a shotgun is a weapon that is not sold freely in Russia; accordingly, volunteers will not be able to organize the supply of these weapons and ammunition to the troops, or it will be extremely difficult to organize this, which will lead to a limitation in the volume of supplies.

In addition, in addition to individual self-defense weapons for fighters, stationary/mobile means of combating FPV drones can also be created, especially since such work is already being carried out, for example, by the Lobaev Foundation (Weapons Technology Development Fund).

Anti-drone turret from Lobaev Z

In early April this year, Lobaev Z was demonstrated on the Telegram channel complex developed by the Lobaev Foundation, designed primarily to combat UAVs.

The complex is a turret with electric drives and an attached weapons module; in the photo and video this is a 12-gauge smoothbore shotgun with a high-capacity drum-type magazine. There is also a version with a weapons module with a rifled barrel; the possibility and feasibility of creating a complex with two weapon modules simultaneously, with a rifled and a smoothbore barrel, is being considered.

Anti-drone turret developed by the Lobaev Foundation. Stills from the video lobaevfond.ru

The author has been a staunch supporter of the development of remotely controlled weapon modules (RCWM) since about 2008, in connection with which this topic has already been raised on the pages of VO in materials "Remotely controlled systems: automated firing points" и “TGP complexes for the Armed Forces of Ukraine: goals and objectives of automated firing points in the northwestern military zone”.

Most of the existing DUMVs are intended for installation on various types of military equipment, but, in addition to them, light mobile DUMVs are also needed, equipped with both specialized weapon modules and those intended for installation of standard types of weapons, such as machine guns with a magazine of increased capacity, light machine guns, automatic mounted grenade launchers, hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers and flamethrowers and much more, and taking into account the need to combat FPV drones, weapons such as smooth-bore shotguns of the Saiga Isp. type. 30" or "Vepr-Hammer".

What could be the scope of application of the turret being developed by the Lobaev Foundation and similar products from other manufacturers?

For example, in areas where there is practically no advance of both the Russian Armed Forces and the enemy, with the help of anti-drone turrets located on hills and other optimal locations for installation, a zone of increased protection from FRU drones can be provided, that is, the turrets will ensure the defeat of most FPV drones, and fighters can defend themselves against single units that break through with individual weapons, primarily with the help of smooth-bore rifles. At the same time, operators of turrets, controlled and supplied with power via wires, can be located in basements, pillboxes, bunkers or other shelters.

Additionally, anti-drone turrets can be located on mobile, wheeled and tracked robotic platforms. Such platforms can periodically change their location in order to increase their own survivability from attacks by FPV drones and enemy artillery or in order to take a more optimal position, and they can also go to replenish ammunition in the safest place for this.

It can be assumed that an effective solution would be to place anti-drone turrets on combat and auxiliary ground vehicles, powered by their on-board network. For example, on tank, on top of the anti-drone “barbecue”, 2 anti-drone turrets can be installed, while the operators controlling them via radio channel in the amount of 4 people can be placed in the landing compartment of an infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) accompanying the tank at some distance, also equipped with a pair of anti-drone turrets - FPV- drones now fly far.

Conclusions

As practice shows, the threats posed by FPV drones are currently only increasing, and therefore providing ground units with individual and group means of protection against FPV drones is of paramount importance.

As an individual means of self-defense against FPV drones, the optimal solution is to use smooth-bore shotguns - 12-gauge shotguns, most likely semi-automatic, such as Saiga Isp. 30" or "Vepr-Molot", although the advisability of using pump-action shotguns cannot be ruled out, as they are more reliable, resistant to contamination and insensitive to the quality of ammunition.

As a group means of self-defense against FPV drones, in addition to electronic warfare equipment, DUMV turrets with smooth-bore weapon modules, placed permanently, on mobile robotic platforms, as well as on combat and auxiliary ground vehicles, can be used.

For example, a T-90M tank with 2 anti-drone turrets on an anti-drone visor, accompanied by a BMP-Z with 2 anti-drone turrets and 4 operators in the landing compartment, supported by an infantry squad with smooth-bore rifles, will be much more protected from FPV drones than just a T-90M tank with an anti-drone visor, accompanied by a BMP-Z and a squad of fighters with an AK-74M.

Such a tank, being relatively safe from attacks from FPV drones, will be able to consistently and precisely dismantle enemy “supports” with its powerful 125 mm cannon. Sappers, under the cover of a platoon of fighters with shotguns and anti-drone turrets on mobile robotic platforms, will be able to clear the area, providing the tank and infantry fighting vehicle with the ability to move forward.

By knocking out the support of FPV drones from the enemy, you can break his defenses, realizing the offensive potential of the Russian Armed Forces, and the basis for this can be ordinary 12-gauge smoothbore guns in the hands of our fighters.

There is no time to delay; massive supplies of shotguns to the RF Armed Forces are necessary.

Comments

[Lech from Android.]

The Armed Forces of Ukraine have exactly the same problems... I read an article by a Polish mercenary today... he says for one Armed Forces officer, our guys used 4 cheap FPV drones... 4 Karl... and still finished him off as he did not dodge or hide.
The question is how to use a shotgun, for example, in the forest?
An FPV drone can suddenly emerge from above and fall on its head... before you even have time to raise your weapon.
Yeah...without automation and electronic warfare, the chances of surviving are still scanty.
At least launch antidrones with the same characteristics unattainable for human reaction.

[SergeyB]

This article describes means of protection for infantry, but I am surprised that simple methods of protection against drones are not used on armored vehicles.
An ordinary mesh screen made of thin wire, with a cell size of 25 by 25 centimeters. The screens are attached 30 centimeters from the armor.
What happens if a drone tries to penetrate such a network?
With a 95 percent probability, an RPG-7-based projectile will pass into a network cell without hitting the wire with the fuse and, accordingly, without exploding.
But the projectile will not reach the armor either, because the drone itself is larger than the size of the network cell. The drone will definitely crash into the wire with its propellers and break off its plastic propellers.
As a result, there are options.
Or the drone will be thrown away from the car.
Or the remains of the drone will fall into the gap between the mesh and the armor. In this case, the fuse may touch the metal and detonate the projectile. But even in this case, the projectile will be located at an acute angle to the armor and will not be able to penetrate it.
I wonder why this method is not used?

[Netl]

Quote: SergeyB

An ordinary mesh screen made of thin wire, with a cell size of 25 by 25 centimeters. The screens are attached 30 centimeters from the armor.

Usually, while approaching the line, armored vehicles are treated with atra. Even fragments from distant breaks are dangerous for such wire. Most likely, it will reach the border with partially cut wires.

But even if you’re lucky, FPV drones try to fly into areas not covered by screens. But it’s impossible to cover it completely. And finally, the most obvious option is an attack with several drones. The first one is remotely detonated in front of the screen, tearing it up. The rest go for an undisguised target. IMHO, the option with anti-cumulative grilles is more preferable. The problems are the same, but the screen itself is more stable.

[Mairos]

FPVs do not attack vertically from above, and what prevents you from shooting upward at an angle of 75-80 degrees?

[tlauicol]

Resetting won't help. From a drone with MONka too. Drones need to be shot down by drones. Long before launching an attack

[Netl]

Quote: Tlauicol

Drones need to be shot down by drones

It’s not easy to even notice an attacking FPV, whose speed is about a hundred and also maneuvers.
And to shoot it down with another drone requires rare luck.

[tlauicol]

Not luck, but a target acquisition program. And not an attacker, but a drone in flight, long before the attack. IR camera sees drones very far away

[Passing]

FPV drone fighters are a useless idea; they will have near-zero efficiency in a global sense. Simply because of the fundamental difficulties with early visual detection of an attacking drone. And without a time reserve of tens of seconds, for the remaining 50-100 meters, i.e. in 2-3 seconds, when you can see the drone with your eyes, launch, aim, and intercept the attacking drone, it’s simply unrealistic. It's impossible to do it manually.
Fighter drones will become relevant only after several conditions are met:
1) creation of a specialized neural network that recognizes an attacking drone against any background.
2a) A simple, reliable and moderately expensive option is to have a continuous all-round video viewing station (ideally + IR). For example, in the form of four 8K cameras on a tripod, which will allow you to circle the drone at least at 100 meters (alas, no kilometers, for those who doubt it, a calculator will help).
2b) An advanced, unreliable, very cumbersome and expensive option (all because of the guidance platform, which is also necessarily gyro-stabilized for equipment) - sound location and pointing the television camera into an area identified by sound. Here we can already talk about kilometers of detection range.
3) Automated launcher for fighter drones, homing of a fighter drone. For case 2a this is mandatory. For case 2b, a manual fighter drone is possible, but taking into account the cost of everything else, it is easier and immeasurably more efficient to make everything automatic at once.
Those. We come to a significant mass and size of the entire farm, i.e. to a specialized PDO (anti-drone defense) vehicle. Which already implies that you can’t give this to every platoon (because it’s expensive), and you can’t take it directly to any assault (because it won’t go everywhere).

[Mairos]

Losses from FPV are an order of magnitude greater than from discharges. You can kill dumpers with a Kalash too.

[air wolf]

Only backpack electronic warfare...

[Nikolaevich I]

I always and long before the SVO said: “Physical” destruction of air targets by air defense means is Primary, the use of electronic warfare is Secondary!

[wladimirjankov]

..

Only backpack electronic warfare...

Of course, you need to use all methods, but portable trench electronic warfare can radically solve the problem of anti-drone protection. Backpack, in the form of an anti-drone gun, on a tripod of any kind. The main thing is that it is always at hand, easily portable and it can detect drones at a distance of 500-1000 meters, the direction of movement, determine their operating frequencies and automatically adjust its jammer to them. These are the guns that soldiers need, and not the ones used in the test described above. There most likely was a gun with one, two or three narrowband standard frequencies that did not match the frequency of the control and video signals of the drone being used. Now that air defense systems use FPV drones with constantly changing operating frequencies, such primitive atidron guns are ineffective and often simply useless. Therefore, you need to make and purchase normal and modern anti-drone guns. They have already been developed and are being produced. Yes, they are much more expensive, but it's worth it.

[Askold65]

In the Northern Military District, with varying degrees of effectiveness, they also use a smoke screen over attacking units.

.... parity or even superiority of the enemy in the number of FPV drones used can largely nullify the superiority of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation (RF Armed Forces) in other types of weapons, we return to this topic again.

So we need to reset all drones - “both ours and yours” and use superiority in other types of weapons.

[your1970]

The author writes that the effectiveness is up to 50 meters and immediately suggests turrets...
How many of them will be needed per department? 2-3-5? And what will their effectiveness be after detection? That's right - 0!!!
A drone will immediately fly in with drops and drop it onto the turrets from 100 meters. And that’s it...
As for shotguns, the existing ones are meaningless. If you introduce them, then only some specially designed ones with a range of at least up to 100 m.
And certainly NOT pumps - only gas outlet.
The existing ones are point-blank shooting no more

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: your1970

Regarding shotguns, the existing ones are meaningless

An alternative to shotguns can be: 1. “ultra-fast-firing” small-caliber shooting systems of the type, for example, “American-180”! This is both an “alternative” to buckshot and a longer “range” than shotguns with a caliber of, for example, 5,6 mm! 2. Currently, the military is interested in the GPR-20 rocket-propelled grenade... What is not an “alternative” to a shotgun? And in the fragmentation-beam “version” you can make it and place the mesh! 3. Why not “remember” the Soviet alternative to the Kolos MANPADS, “reanimated” by modern achievements? 4. It’s time to develop and adopt an anti-drone air defense system similar to the American 40-mm MNTK interceptor missile!

[Netl]

Quote: Nikolaevich I

"American-180"! This is both an “alternative” to buckshot and a longer “range”

There are similar videos on the Internet that with a well-tuned collimator and at the same time using tracers, you can shoot a drone. But this does not apply to the FVP, which rushes at about a hundred and also maneuvers. There, God willing, I wish I could shoot at least once. And this is where the advantage of a shotgun is that, thanks to the scattering of the shot, it forgives accuracy errors.

MANPADS "Kolos" - the same shotgun against larger targets. We have an analogue of MNTK - mini rockets on Pantsir-SM. But all of the above does not solve the problem of the FPV, and they are now the main problem. Here Lobaev offers his own version. Very raw, but at least something.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Netl

We have an analogue of MNTK - mini rockets on Pantsir-SM.

The "mini-missiles" of the Pantsir-SM air defense system are not an analogue of the MNTK interceptor missiles! If only because the MNTK is equipped with a seeker, but the 19Ya6 is not!

Quote: Netl

This is a plus for a shotgun, which, thanks to the scattering of the shot, forgives accuracy errors.

Clear ! You do not have a correct understanding of the operating principle of shooting systems like the American-180!

[Netl]

Quote: Nikolaevich I

MNTK are equipped with seeker, but 19Y6 are not

And what is it for?
The topic was not about comparing the performance characteristics of mini-missiles, but about options for combating drones.
And drones today are made of radio-transparent materials and have an electric engine, so even for high-quality multispectral seekers, this is not an easy goal.

Quote: Nikolaevich I

systems similar to American-180

I didn’t write anything about this rarity. But the idea is, of course, understandable. In order to really increase the likelihood of hitting a drone, in addition to the rate of fire, such a system must also be multi-barreled (and there are examples of such ideas being implemented). But for equipping an ordinary fighter, it’s clearly too much.

[Mairos]

We are talking about what can be done quickly and now. And you're talking about quick-firing little things. Also remember about lasers.

[wlkw]

Whether it’s good or bad, shotguns are now the only thing that really works against drones, not counting the identification and destruction of drone operators, but that’s another topic.
So we need to work on the topic of shotguns until they come up with something better.
As for turrets, you can’t pull them into a trench, of course, but there is such a thing as rear, near, far. That's where placing turrets is a completely workable option.
Regarding the firing range, I always believed that such systems should have “two barrels.” Roughly speaking, buckshot/shot is for point-blank shooting at 20-50 meters, and small-caliber rapid-fire at ranges from 50 and beyond. There is also a theme with grenade launchers with remote detonation of a projectile.
Let's not leave lasers for the future; we certainly won't be able to do without them.

[Passing]

Quote: wlkw

Regarding the firing range, I always believed that such systems should have “two barrels”

There is an immeasurably more economical solution - for long distances we use arrow-shaped elements instead of buckshot. They have a decent speed of 600 m/s from a regular smoothbore, which is very important for long-range shooting at a maneuvering target. True, the existing Western commercial model is not doing well with accuracy. At twenty meters the spread of 19 arrows is the size of a chest target, which is unacceptable at 100-200 meters. Is it possible to improve accuracy? Yes, for sure, we just need to approach the issue systematically, and not at the level of a small private owner, but for this we need to allocate money. The money is essentially modest. But all our money is spent on anything of little use, such as Malva, Gorse, another variation of the MLRS such as Agriculture, and other projects that are fundamentally incapable of changing the situation, but for some reason there is no money for something that can really give a noticeable effect.

[Timur_kz]

Isn’t it easier to make a Tsar Shotgun by boring out the 2A42 and making a grapeshot shell (the production of the cartridge case is mainly established there)? Naturally automated sighting system, plus you won’t regret spending money on a radar. Install it on a Tiger or armored personnel carrier and a completely effective complex is ready.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

As if not in “two”, but in three trunks. Buckshot, net launcher and cumulative fragmentation or high-explosive fragmentation grenades.
At one time, the 40-mm Balkan grenade launcher was a little disappointing, both due to the slow pace of implementation and the rifled barrel. A smooth barrel and a grenade with inclined nozzles to impart rotation were preferred. But you can also shoot buckshot from a rifled barrel.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

And where are we, @paul3390, he’s a communist - a shooter - an Indian? Also, like you, I am an ardent opponent of the use of shotguns against drones. Fraction is ineffective for both of you.
Why aren’t you and him in Kolyma yet?

[your1970]

Why aren’t you and him in Kolyma yet? - for exactly the same reason that you are not in the Kremlin - they don’t take

Now think for two three five hours or however long you think about one thought - why is he (a communist) and I (like an anti-Soviet) both simultaneously - categorically against shotguns???

[Vlad2012]

The difference is that the turret can start firing at a target from a hundred meters away, thanks to a larger magazine. And let’s say we create such a density of fire that 15 out of 20 rounds will hit. But I, for example, won’t shoot 12 magnums quickly and accurately. The drone will push the turret 100 meters up and that’s good.

[atos_kin]

FPV operators need to be blinded by smoke flares and bright flashes around the target.

[Kostadinov]

The smoothbore can also be used against enemy infantry and lightly armored vehicles with sub-caliber, fragmentation or cumulative ammunition, including over-caliber ammunition. This way it will be more universal and will replace conventional small arms.

[your1970]

lightly armored vehicles with sub-calibers, yeah, send you against armored personnel carriers with a double-barreled shotgun....

[Kostadinov]

Two more possibilities for actively destroying FPV.
1. Anti-drone mines on the ground. Similar to anti-helicopter mines, but much lighter. The radius of destruction of flying drones can hit 10 more meters. Something similar can beat the use of active protection systems for armored vehicles on the ground as mines. But the means of detecting drones must be passive. They will detect and destroy active emitting agents.
2. Movable fence on the ground. It can only rise in front of an attacking drone. And the infantry will take cover behind him.

[alextrace]

Is it possible to combine an assault rifle and a shotgun? For example, instead of a grenade launcher, attach a sawn-off shotgun or over-and-under shotgun to the bottom of the machine gun barrel. Aiming at a machine gun is always at hand - you don’t need to take a shotgun instead of a machine gun, but use it depending on the situation. As for the speed of FPV - judging by the video of their use, it does not always go at maximum speed, but circles and chooses a convenient angle of attack. in such a situation it is quite possible to shoot down.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: alextrace

Is it possible to combine an assault rifle and a shotgun?

Back to the Future.
Experienced KAC Masterkey - 80s of the last century.

Serial M26 MASS - 90s of the last century.

[Conjurer]

The main feature of FPV drones is remote control, i.e. radio emissions, by which you can detect it, take direction and aim from afar. But with defeat, there really are problems. The goal is fragile, but too small. Therefore, automatic weapons are needed here.
At a long range, while the drone is not yet actively maneuvering, it can be intercepted with a small-caliber projectile with a controlled detonation, like a regular air target, but at close range, with fast active maneuvering, the barrel is unlikely to help due to problems with the required pointing speed while maintaining accuracy. But there is an option. If at this moment you turn on a continuous high-power broadband jammer, the drone will stop, losing control, and you have a chance to shoot it down from the barrel, and immediately after that remove the jammer so as not to be detected.
Technically, everything is feasible, but it turns out to be a whole complex with radio reconnaissance, automatic guidance and a broadband powerful noisemaker. You can’t assign this to every fighter. But it’s easy for a tank or infantry fighting vehicle.

[Height76]

Why did they forget about the bound buckshot?!

[Oleg Plenkin]

If in modern wars (right in the trenches!), those who allow or initiate them took part (as for example in the Middle Ages, when kings and princes not only declared war and “threw down the gauntlet”, but then, at the head of the army rushed into the attack, shackled in steel from head to toe), including their children and grandchildren who had reached military age, and women would “serve” in the medical ranks. baht and other units serving and providing personnel, NOT FAR from the LBS, then I think that the attitude towards air defense systems and personal protective equipment for fighters would be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. But for this, a completely different elite and a completely different Society will appear in Russia, which is able to “seriously ask” any government about the imitation of “the work done.” And today... Like this(.

[fuffi]

Holy shit, what nonsense.
you are our king. What “other” equipment for fighters would you personally order to purchase?

[Oleg Plenkin]

Nonsense, that's what you write. The commander does not “purchase” anything, but receives the weapons and military equipment that he and his unit are entitled to “according to the state.” And, ideally, the terms of reference for the development of weapons and military equipment are formed by the technical units of military science and the Defense Ministry. The Ministry of Defense, on a competitive basis, after bench, factory and military “full-scale” tests, enters into contracts with contract manufacturers for the production of weapons and military equipment and for its warranty and post-warranty service.
By the way, if I were a king, or at least a prince, boors like you would simply be flogged in the stables.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Oleg Plenkin

then I think that the attitude towards air defense systems and personal protective equipment for fighters would be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

Yeah... the king and his retinue get the best (the only battery of self-propelled self-propelled guns, for example). And let the mob survive on its own; it’s not a noble’s business to take care of the cattle.
Here, for example, is the enlightened Europe of the First World War, Hochseeflotte:

...the lack of food was of a rather interesting nature in the German fleet. The sailors received food at increasingly meager standards. Even bread was gradually replaced by the so-called “Westphalian gingerbread,” which was baked from coarse flour mixed with feed bran. But at the same time, in the wardrooms of the battleships they continued to savor the most tender veal fillet, ice cream and selected cognac.

© Patients
And nothing was on the minds of the gentlemen officers: but we have to go into battle on the same ship, our destinies depend on the lower ranks... well, that’s some nonsense.

[Oleg Plenkin]

You still did not understand the main idea of ​​my comment(. When in ANY war some poor people kill other poor people for the interests, property, assets and capital of the rich, for their economic and political dominance, then the development and production of weapons and military equipment and the rearmament of the army with them is not going at all just like in the case when next to you in the trench there are, if not the main figures of the country, then their children and grandchildren. Just. I think that if it were as I wrote, then wars would begin and be carried out in slightly different ways scenarios...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Oleg Plenkin

When in ANY war some poor people kill other poor people for the interests, property, assets and capital of the rich, for their economic and political dominance, then the development and production of weapons and military equipment and the rearmament of the army with them goes ENTIRELY differently than in the case when next to you in the trenches are, if not the main figures of the country, then their children and grandchildren.

Well, the Pavlovichs and Konstantinovichs in WWI were in the active army on the front line - captains, lieutenants and captains. One of them - Oleg Konstantinovich - died in battle in September 1914. So, did the presence of members of the Family at the front change anything?

[Oleg Plenkin]

Behind the historical facts, you do not see the historical processes against which they occurred. How can you compare the Russian feudal-bureaucratic empire and modern developed post-industrial societies? When, back in the early 10s, during command and staff exercises of the General Staff of Tsarist Russia, specialist generals told top officials that they would not be able to win the war with Germany, since by the second year of the war... The shells will just run out! Where could they be found in a backward country with 90% illiterate peasant population? And, in such a situation, even though the “Tsar-amparator” himself would climb into the trenches, it would not change anything (. And I am writing about the modern situation of bourgeois society, when this is possible, when production structures and capacities exist, scientific schools, or rather their fragments, too. What is missing? State strategy and a new entity in the person of the social state, organizing the processes of ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT and responsibility to society, which, today, simply cannot ask for 30 years of robbery and theft of the country.
Don't compare warm with soft.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Oleg Plenkin

Where could they be found in a backward country with 90% illiterate peasant population? And, in such a situation, even though the “Tsar-amparator” himself would climb into the trenches, it would not change anything (.

The shortage of shells for the future big war was known 10 years before - based on the results of the nuclear war. Almost the entire industry of the Republic of Ingushetia lived off government orders. What did the state and personally do? Master of the Russian Land to solve the problem?
It is very convenient to throw up your hands and say - you got the wrong country, the wrong people. Instead of at least trying run in ten years accumulated backlog.
And so everywhere - wherever you point.

Without access lines, the Izhevsk Plant (the largest enterprise in the empire) used river routes during the navigation period. The access road to the Golyany pier on Kama - a 40-kilometer highway - in the summer during the rainy, autumn and spring became impassable. Traveling even in a light carriage to this distance could take 18 hours, and the transportation of goods stopped.

© Vladimir Polikarpov. Russian military-industrial policy 1914-1917.
But the Izhevsk plant is the largest manufacturer of special steel and rifle barrels:

For all artillery factories, the production of high-grade steel established at the Izhevsk plant was of great importance (using a special method introduced in 1900 “almost simultaneously with the best Swedish factories and completely independently of them”) - panel and spring, but especially tool steel.

The role of the Izhevsk plant was such that it - of course, somewhat exaggerated - seemed to the TsVPK expert even "the only rifle plant in Russia, for Tula and Sestroretsk are not independent factories and serve only as an addition to Izhevsk." But in fact, the manufacture of rough barrels was concentrated in Izhevsk, and the production of rifles for the rest depended on their supply by this plant; during the war, the plant produced 52% of all Russian-made rifle barrels, 79% of machine-gun barrels. Of the small arms produced in Russia, Izhevsk accounted for 43 to 48%; the production of rifles in Izhevsk increased six times - from 82 thousand in 1914 to 313 thousand in 1915 and 505 thousand in 1916.

The State and the Family mercifully removed themselves from preparations for war, not caring about their own offspring, who would have to fight at the front.

Quote: Oleg Plenkin

...including their children and grandchildren who have reached military age, and women would “serve” in the medical profession. baht and other units serving and providing personnel, NOT FAR from the LBS, then I think that the attitude towards air defense systems and personal protective equipment for fighters would be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

And instead, they were engaged in cutting up the budget - for example, in the form of transferring the Nikolaev Admiralty for free rent (with the right to buy) to a company that did not even have a Charter. And he immediately paid her an advance for the construction of the LC. After February, it became clear that among the persons closely associated with the management of this company was the well-known “Admiral of the Court Fleet” Nilov.

[Oleg Plenkin]

And all this is called in one word - feudal-bureaucratic oligarchy). And about the situation, the facts of which you cite, at one time, I read in a book about Russian gunsmiths, Fedorov, Degtyarev, and Shpagin, who designed or were just starting their activities, back in the Russian Empire, before the 1917 revolution. And about the lack of scientific and industrial cooperation, which simply did not exist then, and about the lack of the necessary infrastructure for providing and servicing industrial production. The same roads, engineering networks, educational institutions, units of applied military science, in short, everything that appeared after the industrial revolution in the USSR. I'm talking about something else. About the fact that in ANY oligarchy, be it imperial or liberal-bourgeois, some poor people kill other poor people, but for the interests of the rich, for their property, for their capital and assets, for THEIR economic and political domination. And these poor people have NO control over or influence either the economy, or domestic and foreign policy, or programs for the development, development, and production of weapons and military equipment, but are, even in the best case, just statisticians. For oligarchies, in general, poverty is like a shadow cast by them, like a birthmark on their face. And the situation, in my opinion, can change dramatically only when the educated and qualified “modern poor” create production, engineering, infrastructure, and agricultural petty-bourgeois cooperatives and corporations as collective private property, and, together, work , and fight for YOUR economic, and therefore political, interests. That is, they will form a full-fledged political economic subject of economics, politics and power.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Oleg Plenkin

I'm talking about something else. About the fact that in ANY oligarchy, be it imperial or liberal-bourgeois, some poor people kill other poor people, but for the interests of the rich, for their property, for their capital and assets, for THEIR economic and political domination.

Nothing like that. In WWI, and indeed in WWII, the children of those very rich and influential - Surnames, members of the Central Committee, etc. - also fought on the battlefield.
But this didn’t change anything: even in the case when next to you in the trench are, if not the main persons of the country, then their children and grandchildren, the development and production of weapons and military equipment and the rearmament of the army with them proceeded slowly, slowly and in zigzags.

[Oleg Plenkin]

You probably don’t understand that the development and production of weapons and military equipment depends not only on the location of the “top officials” or their children on the LBS, but first of all on the presence of an effective system of fundamental and applied science, modern knowledge-intensive and high-tech production and infrastructure for its support and service. What am I talking about? The fact that, as a result of targeted state policy, FOR DECADES, military scientific, engineering and design schools, and advanced industrial production are formed and appear, which can determine promising directions of development, conduct R&D, and the necessary tests, and then, physically , on an industrial scale, to produce various types of weapons and military equipment, prepare the infrastructure and specialists who are able to “exploit” them in a qualified manner. Therefore, your examples from World War 1 and WWII are biased. Because even after the industrial revolution in the USSR, scientific and military schools were just being formed, and, for example, engine building, which depended on decades of functioning of scientific schools in materials science, thermodynamics, hydraulics, pneumatics, electrical engineering and electronics, was either absent or they were just starting their activities . It is impossible just yesterday to be a peasant country with an agricultural economy, and today to produce advanced models of weapons and military equipment. There are no miracles. As for the current “order of things”, when the purposeful state policy of the USSR, over decades of hard work of the WHOLE COUNTRY, formed these structures, then, in my opinion, there is no justification for the 30-year destruction by the financial-trading oligarchy of fundamental and applied science, production and has no infrastructure. And modern problems and tragedies of war are a direct consequence of the systemic crimes of the regime in the 90s and 2000s(...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Oleg Plenkin

You probably don’t understand that the development and production of weapons and military equipment depends not only on the location of the “top officials” or their children on the LBS, but first of all on the presence of an effective system of fundamental and applied science, modern knowledge-intensive and high-tech production and infrastructure for its support and service.

Which the country's top officials had to do in the same way - so that their children would not wallow in the mud in front of enemy machine guns. For in the Empire, the same shipbuilding industry was aptly described by Baltic Plant director Kazi as a chimera that exists at the expense of government orders.
All imperial high-tech had to be pulled out by the state. Because the country had practically no domestic market, and foreign ones were already occupied. And with us forever go hunting - feed the dogs - for example, the Ryabushinskys received a loan for a car plant and a government order for cars only in the second year of the war.

So the presence or absence of children of the elite on the front line does not give anything. Nicholas II knew that the younger members of the Family would go to war and be killed there. But he took great care in preparing for war.

[your1970]

children and grandchildren who have reached military age, and women would “serve” in the medical profession. baht and other units serving and providing personnel, NOT FAR from the LBS, then I think that the attitude towards air defense systems and personal protective equipment for fighters would be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT." - there was such an experience.
In the USSR during the Second World War.
And the elite was different.
So what?
Could the population ask her why they botched the beginning of the war? Oh well...
Did the presence of elite children during the war somehow affect the course of the war? It didn't have any effect....

[Oleg Plenkin]

Well, just compare who the sons of the top officials of the Soviet state were during the Second World War and during the period of restoration of the national economy? Officers, scientists and designers defending their country and their people, working for its defense and advanced development. And who became the children of the bastards of the party, economic and Komsomol nomenklatura, and all those who in the USSR controlled and managed EVERYTHING by 1991, who privatized the state, property, means of production, mineral resources, savings of ordinary people in the 90s and 2000s , who robbed and robbed their own population and allowed us to be robbed by predators from all over the world?! In my opinion, you yourself do not understand what you are writing about (...

[your1970]

Well, just compare who the sons of the top officials of the Soviet state were during the Second World War and during the period of restoration of the national economy? и that has this changed? V. Stalin was a pilot; this is why they began to infiltrate faster new technologies or tactics in aviation?
Oh my God...
You relied on the fact that
"then the development and production of weapons and military equipment and the re-equipment of the army with them proceeds ENTIRELY differently than in the case when next to you in the trench are, if not the main persons of the country, then their children and grandchildren'
They gave you examples of both WWI and WWII - when children/brothers of power were at the front in the trenches - and this did not in any way affect the course of the war, strategy, technology.
The presence of V. Stalin did not in any way affect the development of air defense and they did not create a good mine until the end of the war.

You are starting from the wrong premise and exaggerating the influence of an individual too much

[Oleg Plenkin]

What does the role of the individual have to do with it? Even I. Stalin was the most principled representative, spokesman and defender of the interests and goals of the DICTATORSHIP OF THE PROLETARIAT. And then, among government officials who also served these interests and goals, it simply could not be any other way! But, as History shows, all socialist revolutions are conceived by idealists, implemented by fanatics, and their fruits are enjoyed by the bastards who, over the last 30 years, have created the modern oligarchy in Russia. AND ITS OWN POPULATION is cynically and cruelly robbed, robbed, and then “retired.” A hundred years ago, at least there were individuals (...

[Kostadinov]

The main feature of FPV drones is remote control, i.e. radio emissions, by which you can detect it, take direction and aim from afar. But with defeat, there really are problems.

It is not the drone itself that should be hit, but its control station should be easier to hit. It should emit all the time and will be a good target for homing ammunition.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

In the article there is some kind of sharp transition between solid shot for clay pigeon shooting and then buckshot. Immediately from 2,5 mm to 7 mm. In skeet shooting, as I understand it, the shot size of 2,5 mm is chosen for safety reasons for spectators and competition participants. For drone shooting, hard pellets between 3,5 and 4,5 mm are more effective.

[Mikhail Maslov]

The author and many forum users are not aware of how UAVs are used by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. It’s a very interesting read. Based on the enemy’s tactics, it follows that, sadly, a shotgun is not suitable, machine guns, self-propelled guns are only partially and temporarily (they will be destroyed immediately after detection) electronic warfare is also poorly suited, in part, air defense systems for small and high-speed ones are also out of reach. What to do? A difficult question but solvable, unite everything into one network from detection to destruction. By the way, Kalashnikov has developed and is already testing a new tactic called “mining the sky,” time will tell how this tactic will manifest itself Another company of ours has already tested a drone with a fighter jet, there was an article in VO about this drone.

[501 Legion]

There is no point in controlled turrets, they should be strictly automatic from a radar or optical station

[Dedok]

everything here is good, beautiful, but Military Chronicle published a video today
https://youtu.be/0ZENoU4FKLY
in short:

Maxim Klimov visited the front with the task of studying the current situation with electronic warfare and electronic warfare on the line of combat contact. The conclusions are disappointing - we control the sky with our aviation, and the enemy dominates with drones on the ground.
The enemy is switching en masse to non-standard frequencies, PFRF, and is developing its radio-electronic reconnaissance. The frequencies are not secret: from 650 to 850 MHz for ERLS, and when using frequency hopping, jump to 2,4 GHz. FPV drones will soon be equipped with 2-3 receivers with different antennas. We jammed one - we try to fly on the other.
At Army 2023, the "Breakwater" electronic warfare system was presented for the first time to protect Russian armored vehicles - 4 antennas along the perimeter of the combat vehicle to jam the frequencies of enemy drones. It works well according to its declared characteristics (precisely according to the documents), but according to the advertising reports of those who promoted this system - according to their wonderful fictitious performance characteristics, it does not work.
We are talking about a large order from the Russian Defense Ministry and a lot of money and in the end everyone thought that he was jamming everything and everyone.
ВThe second organization (PPSh Laboratory) proposed its own version of electronic warfare for equipment, but ultimately (as of spring 2024) both the first and second cannot offer real armor protection to the Defense Ministry. It’s no secret to anyone, and certainly to the enemy - all trench electronic warfare systems are assembled on Chinese 50-watt modules (on Avito and Ali on sale with some delay in delivery).
The front urgently needs mass means of small-scale mechanization - equipment does not approach the front line closer than 2-5 kilometers. BC, food, wounded and killed, personnel carries in their arms.
The situation in individual units of the Russian army strongly depends on command and self-organization. In one there is a hunger for shells, and in the other a car stands out and drives around and collects abandoned ammunition - there is no hunger. In one, they are afraid to stick their heads out of the trench - there are enemy drones everywhere, and in the other, the command is knocking out electronic warfare from the Ministry of Defense and is actively developing its electronic electronic warfare on the basis of humanitarian aid.
Next, Klimov touches on the topic of FPV drones, in particular those from Sudoplatov (they stubbornly do not change the receivers and the configuration) and washes the bones of the command of the Black Sea Fleet.

[Sedoy]

A T-90M with 2 anti-drone turrets on an anti-drone canopy, accompanied by a BMP-Z with 2 anti-drone turrets and 4 operators in the landing compartment, supported by an infantry squad with smoothbore rifles, will be much more protected from FPV drones than just a T tank -90M with an anti-drone visor, accompanied by a BMP-Z and a squad of fighters with an AK-74M.

Those. There will be no one to fight, everyone will be defending against drones...
And who will do the detection, search from the armor?
Has anyone sat in a tank or infantry fighting vehicle and tried to detect something behind the armor?
Or will they install radars in the tank?