Barrage balloons: guarding industrial facilities and the fuel and energy complex

Due to the lack of real success on the battlefield the intensity of strikes caused by Ukrainian cruise missiles and kamikaze UAVs will only increase – we talked about this in December last year. Now we can clearly assess the reality of this forecast in practice - just compare how many air attack weapons our air defense systems shot down in December 2023, and how many in late March - early April 2024.

Not only the number of Ukrainian air defense systems has increased, but also their nomenclature. The enemy is attacking not only and not so much military targets, but also industrial facilities, infrastructure and the fuel and energy complex. Attacks increasingly began to be carried out on objects located deep in the territory of the Russian Federation (RF), at a greater distance from the line of combat contact (LCC) and the borders with Ukraine.

There is information about the appearance of kamikaze unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in the Armed Forces of Ukraine (UAF) with a range of up to 2500 kilometers, and according to some information - up to 3300 kilometers; the search for targets in Russia and planning a strike are carried out using intelligence and control infrastructure and communications between the United States and other NATO countries.

A significant increase in the number of airborne attack systems of all types, primarily low-flying long-range kamikaze UAVs, will not make it possible to provide air defense for all types of military and industrial facilities. However, we have experience almost a century old, gained during the Second World War (WWII) - the Great Patriotic War (WWII), which simply must be used in our time.

WWII/WWII barrage balloons

Already during the Second World War aviation became a formidable force to be reckoned with. Compared to our time, the number of aircraft of various types produced by industrial enterprises of the warring parties and taking part in hostilities was greater by one, and in a number of positions, by two orders of magnitude. However, the lack of high-precision technology in those days weapons in large-scale production (precision weapons already existed in small quantities) forced the warring parties' aircraft to approach the target directly to bomb or launch unguided missiles. Cruise missiles also appeared at that time, however, their low guidance accuracy made them more of a weapon of intimidation.

"Fields" of barrage balloons

Considering the intensity of raids on cities and industrial facilities, fighter aircraft and air defense systems of that time - anti-aircraft artillery - could not provide guaranteed cover for protected objects, and therefore additional measures were required.

One of the solutions was the use of barrage balloons filled with hydrogen, attached to metal cables at an altitude of about 2000-4500 meters. Cables could also be stretched between several balloons, forming something like a network. If the cable were hit, the plane could literally be cut into several parts.

For example, the Moscow Air Defense Front, organized by a decree of the USSR State Defense Committee dated April 5, 1942, had 1060 barrage balloons. In Leningrad, barrage balloons were manufactured and deployed even during the siege, including the production of hydrogen to fill them. In London, balloons ensured the defeat of up to 4% of German V-1 cruise missiles.

Barrage balloons over ships carrying troops

It may seem that the total enemy losses from barrage balloons were small, but they forced the enemy to deviate from course, reduced the accuracy of bombing, and “exposed” enemy bombers to anti-aircraft artillery and fighter fire. It got to the point that bombers began to be equipped with devices for capturing cables with pyrotechnic charges to cut them.

Balloons shot down by the enemy were quickly repaired and took to the air again. Periodically, about once a month, the balloons needed to be refilled due to hydrogen leakage.

Features of the use of low-flying airborne missiles

First of all, it is necessary to understand that the main threat to us now is posed by low-flying airborne attack systems, the route of which is laid by the Western curators of Ukraine, taking into account the terrain, the location of radar stations (radars) and anti-aircraft missile systems (SAM). If the enemy raises the flight altitude of the kamikaze UAVs, they will become easy prey for Russian air defense systems.

The use of kamikaze UAVs at high altitudes, about 4-5 kilometers, makes sense only if the attacker is able to launch more kamikaze UAVs than the defender can shoot down, thereby depleting its air defense. The number of Ukrainian kamikaze UAVs is currently not enough to overload the Russian air defense; more precisely, they can try to do this, but infrequently and at a limited distance from the LBS line and the borders of Ukraine.

Ukrainian long-range kamikaze UAV AQ 400 Scythe with a flight range of up to 750 kilometers

Since Ukraine currently cannot afford a truly massive use of kamikaze UAVs, its strikes are more of a terrorist nature and are carried out in the hope that at least a small part of the kamikaze UAVs will be able to “leak” through the barriers of Russian air defense systems.

Nevertheless, even a limited number of Ukrainian kamikaze UAVs causes significant damage to Russian industrial facilities and the fuel and energy complex, and therefore it is advisable to consider the possibility of deploying barrage balloons made at the modern technological level, taking into account the characteristics and tactics of using Ukrainian kamikaze UAVs.

Barrage balloons 2024

As we said above, the use of Ukrainian kamikaze UAVs in the depths of Russian territory is only possible when they fly at low and ultra-low altitudes, using the terrain, natural and artificial hills - clearings in the forest, river beds, clearings along roads, etc. As soon as Ukrainian UAVs gain altitude, there is a high probability that they will be detected and destroyed by Russian air defense systems.

Thus, the use of barrage balloons can be considered in two directions. The first is the blocking of possible low-altitude flight routes of kamikaze UAVs. The second is the direct protection of objects that could potentially be attacked and whose destruction could lead to significant consequences.

Accordingly, work within the first direction can only be carried out by public or private structures, on the instructions and under the control of the RF Ministry of Defense, taking into account 3D terrain maps, as well as the location of the radar and air defense systems, in such a way as to force the enemy kamikaze UAV to gain altitude and expose yourself to our anti-aircraft missiles (or it is useless to die by crashing against deployed barriers).

In turn, work in the second direction, direct covering of objects with barrage balloons, can be carried out directly by the owners of these objects, in agreement with certain services (for example, taking into account air traffic safety, so that some ambulance helicopter does not fly in).

Schemes of placement and fastening of Soviet barrage balloons

Considering that we do not need to fight high-altitude targets, the height of the rise of barrage balloons can be about 300-500 meters, and even less for barrage balloons that directly cover objects. As a result, the dimensions of the balloons may be smaller than those used during WWII/WWII, and they may be produced in a much larger series.

If WWII/WWII barrage balloons carried metal cables capable of cutting a bomber or attack aircraft, then our goal is fairly light kamikaze UAVs made of plastic, wood or composite materials, less often of thin metal, moving at a speed of less than 200 kilometers per hour , that is, for their damage-destruction, cable-nets made of composite fibers may be sufficient.

The balloons themselves can also be made of modern materials that are lighter and capable of holding a filler gas longer, which can be a mixture of helium and hydrogen (15% hydrogen and 85% helium), phlegmatized hydrogen - a mixture of hydrogen with inert gases or freons ( with stirring the mixture to eliminate the possibility of its separation). Pure hydrogen can also be used; it is safe without a mixture with air, and special sensors can be installed to monitor changes in the composition of the mixture (diffusion of hydrogen and oxygen).

Thus, we will get barrage balloons placed at an altitude of 100-500 meters, with nets made of composite materials with cells suspended underneath them, with a pitch of 1x1 m or even 0,5x0,5 m. It is possible that it is advisable to place them in two rows, and the networks between them are even two or three rows long.

Barrage balloons over London

Yes, of course, such a solution will cost money, but hardly more than a destroyed distillation column at an oil refinery or losses from its downtime and repairs. The same can be said about many other industrial facilities, as well as the fuel and energy complex.

Conclusions

The use of barrage balloons to protect industrial facilities and the fuel and energy complex from attacks by Ukrainian kamikaze UAVs that have passed the air defense lines will minimize or even eliminate the consequences of their attacks.

Barrage balloons are a time-tested solution that was used during WWII/WWII; the production and deployment of barrage balloons was carried out even in besieged Leningrad.

It is important that barrage balloons are not weapon systems; their deployment by civilian structures from an organizational point of view can be much simpler and faster than the deployment of any active means of countering enemy kamikaze UAVs. Thus, industrial enterprises, holdings and other government and commercial structures can now begin to improve the security of their facilities.

Comments

[Toucan]

I wonder, of the many crazy ideas that Mr. Mitrofanov is gushing about, has any of it been implemented in practice?

[ramzay21]

If we look at how a serious UAV attack on Israel was repelled, we can easily see that most of the Shaheds were shot down by US and Israeli planes that were directing AWACS planes. And without any balloons there. Hence the conclusion. We need something that can perform the functions of AWACS aircraft, which the current authorities have not done in 24 years since the 90s. It is best, of course, to install AFAR panels on business jets and other aircraft and make a mobilization version of the AWACS aircraft. It is possible, of course, to install AFAR panels on the balloons and adjust the lighting of the air situation and the issuance of command control and thus create an adequate air defense system, as it should be.
And what the author proposes is the last line of defense and not its basis. And this is more a gesture of despair and helplessness of the current government.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Not the last frontier at all, but may be an integral part of the system. For example, balloons can cover an industrial zone from the city side. Fire from anti-aircraft systems towards the city is undesirable and can lead to damage and even casualties among civilians.

[ramzay21]

Balloons during the Great Patriotic War would have been an ineffective means without other components of the air defense system. And the year is 2024, we have small-sized antennas, we have thermal imagers, we have AWACS aircraft, we have air-to-air missiles, we have various air defense systems, the only thing we don’t have is competent leaders capable of building a system out of all this.
Look at the massive Israeli UAV attack and how most of the Martyrs were shot down by the US Air Force over Iraq without any airships or other nonsense. It would be nice to understand HOW they did it and WHY and apply all this with us.

As for immediate measures, the following steps can be taken.
We do not have balloons, but we do have weather balloons, there are small-sized radars capable of detecting UAVs and other aerial targets, and it is possible to purchase equipment for creating secure military digital communications. If we combine all this and establish detection of air targets crossing or approaching the border or LBS, as well as establish instant exchange of information with air defense units, we will get a working system for detecting air targets.
We have the opportunity to purchase many thermal imagers, we have helicopters, we have machine guns. If we combine all this together, we will significantly strengthen our air defense.
We again have the opportunity to purchase thermal imagers, there are UAZ and Niva pickups, there are machine guns (in extreme cases, Maxim) and there are a lot of people who have served in the army. If we combine all this and integrate it into the air defense system, we will get many mobile air defense points against UAVs, which will also strengthen our air defense capabilities against UAVs.

We also have several flying Tu-204/214, we have several dozen of these aircraft in storage, we have the capacity to produce these aircraft, we have specialists capable of creating AWACS aircraft, we have AFAR. If we combine all this, then after some time we will get a cheaper and more widespread AWACS aircraft than the A-50U and even more so the A-100. And if we have a sufficient number of AWACS aircraft to ensure their presence in the required areas 24/7, then no balloons will be needed.

[alexoff]

the only thing missing is competent leaders capable of building a system out of all this.

I am 99% sure that this is deliberate sabotage from above, and not ineptitude. Those in charge here don’t know that there are hangars; in fact, they basically don’t want to do anything. After all, then our respected partners may decide that we are starting, and then they can start. To begin with, they will cut off all iPhones, upset hundreds of thousands of wives and children of important people, a terrible blow to the country!

[hagen]

Quote from alexoff

I am 99% sure that this is deliberate sabotage from above, and not ineptitude.

Instead of faith, I prefer knowledge. With stories about faith, it’s better to go to ..... church.

[alexoff]

Well, do you really think that there is at least one logical, non-political reason not to build hangars even for front-line aviation?

[DenVB]

Quote: ramzay21

how most of the Martyrs were shot down by the US Air Force over Iraq without any airships or other nonsense

Yes, it seems that our Air Force is avoiding the country’s air defense missions in every possible way. Although, it seems, there are planes for this - old MiG-29s would be quite enough for patrolling and shooting down flying lawn mowers.

[ramzay21]

Although, it seems, there are planes for this - old MiG-29s would be quite enough for patrolling and shooting down flying lawn mowers.

Helicopters, even ordinary Mi-8s, can shoot them down if you put at least a couple of PCs on it and provide thermal imagers to the crew and gunners.
But the main task is to DETECT targets, and for this you need to overcome the limitations of the radio horizon, complicated by the terrain, and the only way to solve this is to raise the antenna as high as possible.

[DenVB]

Quote: ramzay21

Helicopters, even ordinary Mi-8s, can shoot them down if you put at least a couple of PCs on it and provide thermal imagers to the crew and gunners.

Helicopters have speed comparable to drones. That is, each drone will require approximately one helicopter. Having shot down one, the helicopter will no longer be able to keep up with the others.

And in principle, a helicopter cannot keep up with a cruise missile.

Quote: ramzay21

The only way to solve this is to raise the antenna as high as possible.

The MiG-29 has such an antenna. He himself can detect targets in patrol mode. Not a perfect solution, but for lack of a better solution it's at least something

[ramzay21]

Helicopters have speed comparable to drones.

This is wrong. The Mi-8 can accelerate to 250 km/h, the Mi-17 up to 280, the Mi-24 generally up to 335 km/h, and the Geranium-2 flies at a speed of 150-170. Therefore, having received a control center for targets, the Mi-8/17 can catch up with the target and, having equalized the speed, conduct aimed fire until the target is completely destroyed, after which it can engage in the destruction of the second target and the difference in speed is from 80 to 130 km/h for the Mi-8 and Mi-17 This allows it completely. And the Mi-24 with a 30 mm air cannon is generally an ideal UAV fighter. But they all need to detect the target and obtain the control center, and without antennas in the air there is no way to do this.

The MiG-29 has such an antenna. He himself can detect targets in patrol mode.

The MiG-29 avionics complex is not able to detect such an inconspicuous target as a UAV at a considerable distance, so in patrol mode it will burn a lot of kerosene and there may be no result at all. Do you think why the Americans, having much more advanced radars on the F-35, continue to patrol and detect targets with AWACS aircraft?
The target must first be detected and only then planes and helicopters must be directed at it. And we have nothing to detect UAVs and missile systems flying at low altitude.
Yes, it would be reasonable to use the MiG-29 to destroy detected UAVs, but helicopters can also work against these targets.

[DenVB]

Quote: ramzay21

This is wrong. The Mi-8 can accelerate to 250 km/h, the Mi-17 up to 280, the Mi-24 generally up to 335 km/h, and the Geranium-2 flies at a speed of 150-170.

Yes, but the geraniums are flying in different directions. While he was chasing one "geranium", the second managed to fly twenty kilometers to the side. While I was chasing the second one, the third one went a hundred kilometers in the other direction. That’s it, you can’t catch up with her even at maximum gas.

Quote: ramzay21

Do you think why the Americans, having much more advanced radars on the F-35, continue to patrol and detect targets with AWACS aircraft?

I am with both hands for AWACS aircraft. But they don’t exist - in reality, not in theory. In the meantime, they are not there - I suggest using at least what is already there. No matter how imperfect it may be.

[ramzay21]

Yes, but the geraniums are flying in different directions. While he was chasing one "geranium", the second managed to fly twenty kilometers to the side.

So far, the Ukrainians are attacking with single UAVs, or at best several, this time. The UAVs are flying from the direction of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, which means they have one direction, they can of course split up, but not into 20 groups, but helicopters don’t fly one at a time, and if one helicopter pursues one group of UAVs following the same course, then it will be able to destroy them All.

I am with both hands for AWACS aircraft. But they don’t exist - in reality, not in theory

But in reality, the task is to raise the antenna as high as possible above the ground and weather balloons are the cheapest and fastest option to do this. The second fastest option is to equip UAVs of the Orlan/Pacer type with AFAR canvases, and this must be started to be done as this is how a tactical AWACS UAV is obtained.

[Trapperxnumx]

Well, don’t forget that Israel has been at war for many years and its area is much smaller than Russia. This allows for much better control of the airspace.
This doesn't even include US support.

[alexoff]

In Israel it flies stronger, from many directions. But he uses active defense, hunting for enemy dignitaries, industries, etc. And he doesn’t expect the United States to ask Iran not to shoot at Israel so that oil prices don’t rise

[ramzay21]

Israel is simply fighting, and as you know, we haven’t started yet. That’s why the enemy still has intact bridges across the Dnieper, although he has all the means to destroy them.

[alexoff]

What about the bridges, not a single Ukrainian official was injured during this time! And all the generals are alive and well, we don’t touch anyone older than the colonel

[Mustached Kok]

we need something that can perform the functions of AWACS aircraft

Or maybe it’s better not to produce “something” but to simply produce the AWACS aircraft themselves?
Here we will come up with anything, just not to do what needs to be done. We do not have any mid-level light AWACS based on twin-engine turboprops. There are also no large ones based on wide-body aircraft. It’s okay not to produce our own planes. But at least take planes from stock, or buy up some of the planes that are in the hands of airlines. The Yak-42 is a good basis for light AWACS (like those built on the basis of a business jet).

[ramzay21]

Or maybe it’s better not to produce “something” but to simply produce the AWACS aircraft themselves?

It is necessary to produce AWACS aircraft, but firstly, it takes a very long time and secondly, no one in the country’s leadership can make such a decision, either due to lack of training or because of deliberate sabotage.
And there are ready-made Tu-204/214 aircraft, including those flying in the same SLO Russia, and there are as many as 204 simple Tu-214/5 there and it costs nothing to take a couple of aircraft from there to convert one into an AWACS aircraft and the other into an aircraft PLO similar to the American Poseidon. The Tu-204/214 is an excellent aircraft, it can patrol for about 10 hours without refueling, its two engines are exactly the same as those on the new Il-76 and they consume half as much kerosene, the aircraft is manufactured in Kazan.
If you apply modern technologies and build an aircraft with AFAR canvases instead of a mushroom and install modern equipment, then all the equipment will fit into it and in terms of its characteristics it will be significantly ahead of the A-50U and will not be inferior to the A-100, only it will be much cheaper and more widespread, because as there are several dozen already built T-204\214 in storage, there is no queue from the military as for the new Il-76, and its production is increasing.
However, this will take years even with competent guidance, but it needs to be detected now, and therefore the option with a weather balloon is the most quickly feasible.

There is another option to install AFAR canvases on the Pacer/Orion UAV instead of its standard equipment and make a tactical AWACS UAV capable of hanging in the air for 24 hours. But this again takes time and most likely requires the construction of a new plant. Although we really need such AWACS UAVs and four such UAVs will be able to provide 24/7 coverage of the air situation in a 300 km long strip!

[p-wainman]

Are you going to detect cardboard INTENSE LOW ALTITUDE LOW SPEED UAVs using AFAR on an AWACS aircraft? The idea is interesting. Let's try to analyze it.

1. Why are there not enough of these planes? The answer is simple. Very complex equipment and prohibitive cost.
2. It’s probably possible to distinguish a low-speed cardboard drone with ceramics for a SMALL engine at low altitude from an object on the ground using a fast-flying and (comparatively) high-altitude AWACS aircraft, but the equipment for this requires super-complex and, most likely, non-existent equipment .
It is advisable to have a locator that is stationary (I did not say *not movable*).
3. Why is AFAR used? Determine the distance and direction to the target. The thing is complex and expensive, energy-consuming. In addition, the less visible the target, the less useful the AFAR is.

If the signal emitter is stationary and at an altitude of, say, 500 m, then the height of the UAV, which is, say, 20 m, will be no more than 4% of the height of the emitter. Those. with good accuracy we can assume that the UAV is moving on the ground. Local objects on the ground linked to coordinates, based on information from three receivers, will give the location of the UAV. Algorithms for selecting moving targets have long been developed.

Those. modularity of the equipment on cheap tethered balloons, its simplicity, compactness, low energy consumption - these are the advantages of a balloon network over its territory. Plus, it is easy to place sensitive MICROPHONES on the same balloons, since they are radar stealthy. Nobody canceled the UAV. It is possible that UAV sonar will be much more effective than radar!
Again, no one has canceled the effect of the balloon cable on the aircraft.

Thus, a network of tethered balloons over its territory provides a relatively cheap and effective tool for combating low-altitude and stealthy targets.

[hagen]

Quote: ramzay21

It is possible, of course, to install AFAR panels on the balloons and set up illumination of the air situation and the issuance of control information

I think this is the most optimal proposal. "....Two years ago, the balloons rose to a height of 17 km. The duration of their loitering was about a month. It is planned to increase it to a year. The balloons' suspension will contain relay systems, as well as radar monitoring systems for missile defense. Their radio visibility is at an altitude of 40 km reaches 900 km, they do not have “dead zones” (VKS magazine article, No. 2 (87) October 2016)...."...For the needs of the North American air defense system NORAD, huge 70-meter unmanned airships AWACS were developed, which should were to hang for 30 days at an altitude of up to 24 kilometers and detect flying Russian missiles at a range of up to 740 km. During the tests, it turned out that despite the seemingly archaic design, such devices are extremely durable and do not fall like stones when hit. On the contrary, they smoothly descend due to the fact that inside they are divided into segments and filled not with hydrogen, but with helium...” So work on the development of balloon systems is underway both here and in other countries. The whole question is in the technical capabilities of our radars for identifying small and medium-class UAVs and the ability of industry to establish their mass production.

[Uncle lee]

"Fields" of barrage balloons

I was amazed by the number of balloons. Grandiose!

[Toucan]

I was amazed by the number of balloons. Grandiose!

It may be pointless, but what is the potential for cutting....

[Uncle lee]

Quote: Tucan

Even if it's pointless

In the current realities, yes... I was struck by the scale of the barriers and the meager effect of their use.

[BAI]

How many of these balloons will come off? How many stranded civilian aircraft will be on the way? How many civilian planes will crash as a result?
Look at Flytradar in Europe, how many planes there are. And a RUSSIAN balloon with a cable will take you there. What will happen?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: BAI

How many of these balloons will come off? How many stranded civilian aircraft will be on the way? How many civilian planes will crash as a result?
Look at Flytradar in Europe, how many planes there are. And a RUSSIAN balloon with a cable will take you there. What will happen?

A normal and workable idea for object cover, especially taking into account modern materials. And you shouldn’t be afraid of cliffs, firstly, the balloons are tied not only to the ground, but also to each other, and secondly, there are emergency valves for releasing the gas mixture...

[ramzay21]

How many of these balloons will come off? How many stranded civilian aircraft will be on the way? How many civilian planes will crash as a result?

Firstly, our government is not able to produce balloons, not only in the same quantities as the Stalinist USSR, but even 5% of that quantity.
Secondly, in the form that the author suggests using balloons, they are useless. They will be useful if you install an AFAR panel and a repeater on it and hang it a hundred kilometers from the border or LBS.
Thirdly, they do not pose any danger to civil aircraft if they are located where airports are closed today, simply because they will very quickly fly higher than 10 thousand meters.

Look at Flytradar in Europe, how many planes there are. And a RUSSIAN balloon with a cable will take you there. What will happen?

Nothing will happen! Winds in the Northern Hemisphere blow from West to East and all these balloons will take off and fall on our territory.

[DenVB]

Quote: ramzay21

Firstly, our government is not able to produce balloons, not only in the same quantities as the Stalinist USSR, but even 5% of that quantity.

Well, that's generally not true. These balloons will be smaller than those from the Second World War, and they can be made from polymer films, which are produced in considerable quantities. You can contract out production to private traders - they will cut and paste them on very quickly.

[DenVB]

Quote: BAI

How many of these balloons will come off? How many stranded civilian aircraft will be on the way? How many civilian planes will crash as a result?

This is all easy to solve. In the event of lift-off, the automatic gas release valve is activated and the balloon lands smoothly. During the war, they even made parachutes for cables - so that if the cable was torn off from the balloon, the cable would not fall like a steel whip, but would fall smoothly.

[Rvlad]

This is kind of crazy. Whatever the article, at least take out the saints...

[75 Sergey]

No, the idea is normal, networks seem to have already started doing this


Looking at the comments, people don't like the idea at all.

[evgen1221]

A cube made of mesh has balloons in the corners, a total of 5 projections are covered from small items, and larger ones are a concern for air defense. Technically possible, but for not very large objects, because the weight of the mesh, especially from above, will put pressure.

[p-wainman]

Many commentators simply do not see the amount of costs for the options they propose for solving the problem of effective defense against low-altitude and SILENT air attack weapons. Let's say balloons.
1. Cheap, hang for as long as desired at a given or required height.
2.Can be equipped with highly sensitive MICROPHONES with small-sized and low-power sound transmitters to a powerful processing server on EARTH.
3. There is no need for AFAR, a computer and other accessories that together require a lot of energy. It is enough to make one balloon higher, and hang a simple signal emitter on it, and hang a simple receiver of reflected signals on another balloon at a lower altitude. In the protected area ON THE GROUND, place plastic metallized reflectors with known coordinates. For binding reflected signals from moving targets. Connect the signal receiver to a powerful server on EARTH. With such modularity of equipment on balloons, its cost and energy consumption will be low.

Thus, the respected author’s ideas about the use of balloons look very attractive. A network of balloons over its territory will make it possible to use helicopters for showdowns with low-altitude, low-speed targets; it’s cheap. Elements of this network (balloons and servers) are easy to move, reducing enemy intelligence data to zero. And if the balloons break off and fly towards Geyropa, then that’s their problem. What does that matter to us?

[bone1]

For the author, “Former Civilizations” is about the Second World War? And it’s easy to fight drones - the commander of the air defense section missed the drone - to the wall

[Vlad Gor]

The detection system comes first. There is no point in discussing security measures if there is no detection and tracking system. The detection system should be cheap, Russian industry can produce products right now, i.e. I have everything. The product must be installed on site simply and quickly.
I propose to install towers along dangerous directions on which locators will stand. Use power transmission line (PTL) supports as a tower. For example, the highest power transmission line tower with a height of 197 m is located in the city of Balakovo. Power line supports are produced in series. Towers 50 meters high should be installed every 40 km. The locators must be taken ready-made, ship-borne ones. Install two locators on each power line tower. Below in the trailers there is equipment, a generator, and a support service. 20 towers installed along the perimeter, every 40 km, with a height of 50 m, cover 800 km.
From my point of view, this is the cheapest and fastest option for solving the problem of UAV detection.

[UA3QHP]

From my point of view, this is the cheapest and fastest option for solving the problem of UAV detection.

And if you consider that the towers are already standing, these are cell towers. The only thing left to do is the receivers.

[Vlad Gor]

You can use television and radio towers, for example Ostankino. The question here is to make it simple, fast, cheap, and have all the necessary components mass-produced in the Russian Federation. One power line with a foundation is installed in a week, ten teams will install 10 power line supports in one week, another week will be spent on installing antennas and connecting. There is a choice of ready-made radars, you can install land and ship ones. Those. In just one month, a perimeter 880 km long can be closed.

[Murphy]

Towers can be attacked by drones. The option with movable airships covering the entire border looks more interesting.

[Vlad Gor]

What I know. The issue of the need for R&D of the stratospheric airship AWACS was raised to the level of the Ministry of Industry and Trade in 2012. The answer is no need. At that time, priority was given to work on the A-100, which began in 2000. A stratospheric airship AWACS would now be of great help in the air defense system, because from a height of 30 km, 1000 km are visible. This complex product will require 5 years of work. Detection and tracking means are needed now, there is a war going on.

[DenVB]

Quote: Vlad Gor

because from a height of 30 km 1000 km are visible

It's useless. A subtle target, such as a drone or Storm Shadow, will simply not be detected by the radar at such a distance, from any height. It is better not to chase super-heights and super-ranges, but to take numbers - more simple and cheap balloons, airships, drones, small aircraft, etc. radar carriers.

[Edvid]

///////////////////////////////
Electromagnetic direction finding is practically useless for detecting small, low-flying drones. As an additional means of direction finding of targets in the near zone, it is necessary to create an acoustic direction finding system (microphones). They can be installed on the surface, or lifted on pilot balloons on a leash. Such a system is tens of times cheaper than those based on the electromagnetic principle, which they are trying to create for such conditions. Despite all the inventive tricks, they are of little help due to the significant attenuation of EM waves near the ground, vegetation and the small reflective surface of the target. It is not clear who is responsible for introducing new products in this area. There are many useful proposals on the forums, but little is done by those who are obliged to implement them, even elementary ones. In rare videos from the front, we see how the craftsmen themselves implement new products in makeshift conditions without waiting for the “darkness” to swing. If the current military slog is planned to continue, then the need to speed up the implementation of the proposals is self-evident. First of all, this will save people's lives. You shouldn’t be fooled by losses of 1/5, much less the nonsense of 1/10. You can compare by official figures for the exchange of bodies of dead fighters - usually 1/3. In addition, there is a Chinese swarm of drones in the forest: https://disk.yandex.ru/i/k-eabszwRspfBQ

[DenVB]

Just on the topic of balloons, if anyone hasn’t looked.

[89824024836]

The most acceptable, inexpensive and no alternative way to combat UAVs is to use a pair of small standby unmanned helicopters, between which is attached a strong, lightweight nylon net, probably at least 20 m high, up to 300 m long and with a mesh of (400x400) mm. Unmanned helicopters are on duty on the ground, in the area of ​​possible UAV flight paths. When receiving information about the approach of a group of UAVs, even to the left or right up to 20 km, the pair with the net rises and flies to intercept. Modern SRCs and other means and methods, including smartphones with software, are able to see the flight of a UAV and promptly report it to the network protection control center. THOSE. a pair of unmanned helicopters with a light and strong network stretched between them can intercept UAVs at a front of up to 40 km.

[acetophenone]

Utter nonsense. There's really nothing to discuss. The author is just a cormorant.