Specialized air defense systems and missiles for combating UAVs

46
Specialized air defense systems and missiles for combating UAVs
Ukrainian FPVDrones shock purpose. Photo Twz.com


Modern anti-aircraft missile systems and systems are capable of combating a variety of air targets, including small and medium-sized unmanned aerial vehicles. Moreover, the characteristics of typical anti-aircraft missiles may be excessive for such purposes, which worsens the technical or economic aspects of interception. In this regard, a number of countries are exploring the creation of specialized air defense systems and missile defense systems to combat small-sized UAVs.



Objective factors


Until recently, the main targets for air defense systems were considered to be full-size aircraft - airplanes, helicopters and heavy large UAVs. The required level of performance of anti-aircraft systems and their missiles was determined by the need to detect and ensure the destruction of precisely such objects. As a result, modern missile defense systems can have a flight range of up to several hundred kilometers and carry a warhead weighing tens of kilograms.

Now the main threats from the air include small and medium-sized UAVs for reconnaissance and strike purposes. They have their own specifics and are a more difficult target for modern air defense systems. A number of their features make interception difficult and also worsen economic performance. An important factor in this context is the discrepancy between the characteristics of anti-aircraft missiles and the tasks being solved.

Thus, most light UAVs can be detected and tracked only at short ranges or in the near zone. In this regard, the launch of the missile defense system is carried out from a minimum distance, and the ammunition does not get the opportunity to realize its full energy potential and show all its flight characteristics. Then there may be difficulties in aiming at an inconspicuous target. Small UAVs are not durable; a single bullet or shrapnel is often enough to destroy them. In this case, a warhead weighing kilograms or more is simply redundant.


Chinese MANPADS "Xu Jian". Photo by Jane's

The widespread use of drones and the emergence of new tactics for their use, incl. to solve combat missions, in recent years it has become an incentive for the development of anti-aircraft weapons and the expansion of their functions. In particular, projects of specialized systems or ammunition for them, designed specifically to combat UAVs, are already being proposed. Artillery systems are still the most popular in this area. However, missile systems with corresponding capabilities have already appeared.

Chinese solutions


China was one of the first to tackle the problem of protection against small UAVs. He presented the first developments in this area in the middle of the last decade, ahead of some other countries. However, it is not yet known whether the new models have reached adoption.

In November 2016, the Chinese aerospace corporation CASC first showed the Xiu Jian (Hidden Sword) multi-purpose compact missile system. This product was created as a compact portable means for high-quality reinforcement of infantry and special forces. It was proposed to be used as a lightweight MANPADS capable of hitting airplanes, helicopters and UAVs, as well as as an anti-tank weapon to combat lightly armored targets.

“Xiu Jian” was made in the form of a compact installation for firing from the shoulder. The basis of the complex was a launching device with a tubular guide, a sight and a fire control device. The total length of the product in firing position is approx. 700 mm, weight – no more than 10 kg. The complex included a guided missile with a length of 690 mm and a caliber of 60 mm with a mass of 4 kg. The ammunition received a simplified and cheaper photoelectric homing system. The launch range of the missile against an air target was stated at 2 km, against a ground target – 3 km. The possibility of placing the Sword on an aerial platform with an increase in range to 5 km was also mentioned.


A fighter with a grenade launcher and a QN-22 missile. Photo: Bmpd.livejournal.com

The development organization claimed that by the time of the first show, the new complex had already passed tests, and preparation for production had also been completed. They were going to launch the series if there was an order. Subsequently, “Xiu Jian” was repeatedly shown at new exhibitions, but nothing was reported to customers about the series and deliveries.

In 2018, Wuhan Guide Infrared introduced the QN-202 “micro-missile homing system.” The basis of this complex was a new small-sized missile with a full-fledged seeker. An existing 40-mm hand grenade launcher was proposed as a launcher for it. A backpack container for carrying six missiles was also demonstrated. It was reported that the QN-202 complex with ammunition can be carried and used by just one person.

The rocket for the QN-202 was made in a cylindrical body with a transparent head fairing and two sets of folding planes. Product length – approx. 500 mm, weight – 2 kg. Using a solid fuel engine, it flew 2 km. The product received a simplified infrared seeker, suitable for attacking air and ground targets. The parameters of the warhead were not specified.

The QN-202 complex attracted the attention of specialists and the public, but apparently things didn’t go any further. The adoption of such a complex for service has not been reported.

American project


A few years before the QN-202, the American company Raytheon showed a similar missile system called Pike. It was a small-sized missile designed to be launched from standard 40 mm grenade launchers. The main task of such ammunition was considered to be combating ground targets, but the possibility of working against low-speed air targets was not excluded. However, such potential of the complex has not been fully tested and/or demonstrated.


American product Pike. Photo by Raytheon

The Pike missile has a caliber of 40 mm, a length of 430 mm and a weight of 770 g. It was possible to fit a full-fledged semi-active laser homing head and a high-explosive fragmentation warhead weighing 270 g into the product body. The maximum firing range was determined to be 2 km.

The Pike product has been tested and has confirmed its performance. It was introduced to the international market, but little success was achieved. So far, only one order from Canada is known. The special forces of this country received a number of missiles. Whether they use the light missile's anti-aircraft capabilities is unknown.

Russian Experience


The Russian army uses portable air defense systems of current models - “Igla” and “Verba” - against light enemy UAVs. Full-size complexes are practically not involved in such tasks for objective reasons. However, the Ministry of Defense and industry take into account the existing threats and take action.

A few years ago it became known that the Pantsir-SM missile and gun complex would receive a new specialized weapon against UAVs. A missile defense system known as 19Ya6 was developed for it. This product is noticeably shorter than standard Pantsir missiles and is several times lighter. Four missiles of this type are placed in transport and launch containers, placed on standard launcher mounts.

All technical features of the new 19Y6 rocket remain unknown. However, it is reported that it is equipped with a radio command guidance system and has a flight range of up to 8-10 km. The mass of the warhead has been reduced to an acceptable level corresponding to the tasks being solved.


ZRPK "Pantsir-SM" at the parade. New TPKs with small-sized missiles are visible. Photo by the Russian Ministry of Defense

According to known data, the Pantsir-SM air defense missile system and the new missile defense system for it are at the final stage of testing. There were also reports of military tests in the zone of the Special Operation to Protect Donbass. All this indicates the imminent completion of the entire inspection program, the launch of mass production and the entry of equipment into the troops.

Different approaches


The need to counter light and medium UAVs has not raised questions for a long time, and various ways to solve this problem have been proposed. Moreover, certain means for suppression or interception are actively acquired by leading armies, and some of them even use such equipment during real combat operations.

The fight against UAVs is carried out using different methods and means. It is possible to suppress their radio communication and navigation channels by means of electronic warfare or destroy the device using cannon weapons or missiles. For various reasons, electronic warfare stations and barrel systems are most widespread in practice. However, measures are being taken in the field of missiles, and new specialized air defense systems and missiles are appearing, optimized to combat small UAVs.

It is quite possible that air defense systems designed to combat UAVs will hit the battlefield in the near future and will be able to show their capabilities. There is every reason to expect that 19Ya6 products and other similar developments, incl. foreign ones will perform well and will be included in the standard ammunition of anti-aircraft systems.
46 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    April 25 2024 05: 23
    It is quite possible that air defense systems designed to combat UAVs will hit the battlefield in the near future and will be able to show their capabilities.
    but for now ...
    1. +1
      April 25 2024 05: 39
      Quote: Aerodrome
      but for now ...

      What's wrong with that?
      Add a laser rangefinder, a ballistic computer, and you can already think about automating the process.
      Budget-friendly, but not enough for a light drone that doesn’t fly high.
      A special anti-missile missile is expensive, therefore it is not mass-produced, but mass-scale is needed.
      1. +1
        April 25 2024 05: 41
        Quote: Hitriy Zhuk
        Quote: Aerodrome
        but for now ...

        What's wrong with that?
        Add a laser rangefinder, a ballistic computer, and you can already think about automating the process.
        Budget-friendly, but not enough for a light drone that doesn’t fly high.

        who will add? Do you understand that this is a handicraft?
        1. +2
          April 25 2024 05: 43
          Quote: Aerodrome
          who will add? Do you understand that this is a handicraft?

          All “quadrics” are handicrafts.
          Well, okay, some companies, but the dumps are handicraft.
          Kamikaze quads are generally a terrible handicraft, sometimes done almost near the front line.
          And they exist, they are made, it works.
          1. +2
            April 25 2024 05: 46
            Quote: Hitriy Zhuk
            Quote: Aerodrome
            who will add? Do you understand that this is a handicraft?

            All “quadrics” are handicrafts.
            Well, okay, some companies, but the dumps are handicraft.
            Kamikaze quads are generally a terrible handicraft, sometimes done almost near the front line.
            And they exist, they are made, it works.

            what does MO do?
            1. 0
              April 25 2024 05: 48
              Quote: Aerodrome
              what does MO do?

              Shashechki you or go?
              (and the vector of the conversation goes to where discrediting and so on loom)

              In general, something similar (such as an auto-aiming twin under the PKM, and with removable standard PKM) could, for example, be done on a Kalashnikov. The concern doesn't do anything there.
            2. +2
              April 25 2024 11: 35
              The topic itself is relevant, but it must be considered in its entirety. What is anti-drone warfare? This is the same air defense, in this case, as if in a mini format. In the mini, this is not about the organization; the organization must be built in its own image and likeness. If we take aircraft-type drones, then their destruction should still be included in the area of ​​responsibility of the “large” military air defense. But for FPV and other similar ones, it is necessary to develop just “mini-PVO”. What is needed for this? Just like in the older brother, detection comes first. To control the general space of existing means, it seems necessary to add something more specialized (mobile, with quick response and resolution). Next is the organization of collecting, processing and transmitting information (the system should be very fast and efficient, apparently subordinated at a lower level). Well, then you can move on to weapons, which apparently need to include interceptor drones (there was a video in a cart, a drone shot the grid effectively neutralized the enemy drone) electronic warfare and other weapons. All this, at the level of development already achieved, should be controlled by the so-called AI; today machine learning can easily implement this (it can calculate the interception of a detected drone and launch a drone with a mesh to intercept it).
              In general, we need an organized system, of course I described all this in an amateurish format, but the direction seems right to me. Air defense with individual launchers is not able to solve anything, but air defense as a system is already a serious weapon. I think the struggle at this level is chaotic so far, but the development of methods and means in this direction is simply screaming.
      2. +5
        April 25 2024 05: 54
        If we take into account the life of the gun on the front end, a missile from a disposable container will be cheaper.
        In addition, according to my estimates, to destroy a drone at a distance of 1 km, 4000 bullets or shells are needed in 2 seconds. We do not have such weapons and NEVER will have them. I don’t think we’ll fantasize about one and a half to two hundred Kalash rifles controlled by one ballistic computer.
        The indicators could correct explosive shells with detonation using a radio signal or a timer, but we don’t have them YET. The same six-inch gun, when fired from a closed position, will be effective when detonating a high-explosive projectile 50 meters from the UAV. However, there are no corresponding guidance systems yet either.
        1. -2
          April 25 2024 06: 01
          Quote: also a doctor
          need 4000 bullets or shells in 2 seconds

          But why?
          If you calculate the distance and know the distance, isn’t it too much?
          No precision?

          Quote: also a doctor
          However, there are no corresponding guidance systems yet either.

          But this is the whole problem.
          With a guidance system, even a Kalash gun on a module could shoot down a quad.

          Quote: also a doctor
          explosive shells with detonation by radio signal or timer, but we don’t have them YET

          What, the “powder tube” was also removed from the projectile?
          I thought that at least a tank and a BMP-3 could create a blast.
          Or is it only on WWII era guns and by hand?
          1. +7
            April 25 2024 07: 26
            Target detection - target defeat.
            1. It is impossible to develop a complex for detecting and tracking a small target such as an FPV drone; there is an example that is already working - CCTV cameras with recognition of people’s faces and car license plates.
            2. The means of destruction must be area-based, for example, like on tanks, smoke grenades only equipped with destructive elements and shooting of unfolding nets, both of which have long been invented and produced.

            Thus, without running into difficulties with the miniaturization of missile defense systems, an anti-drone complex can be built from completely ready-made elements.
          2. 0
            April 25 2024 14: 36
            Even absolutely accurate guidance, even vice versa: absolutely accurate guidance in particular, is useless against a maneuvering drone. The figure of 4000 bullets is ungodly underestimated for a drone that began an anti-aircraft maneuver.
            1. +1
              April 25 2024 15: 12
              Quote: also a doctor
              useless against a maneuvering drone

              Well, there is approximation and the like, again, he doesn’t always maneuver.
              The trick is to hit it well before it figures out how to maneuver.
        2. +6
          April 25 2024 06: 24
          Shooting down a quadcopter or drone, aircraft type, homing small-sized MANPADS is not much fun. Everything is great here only from the manufacturer of these MANPADS. Our army people are blinkered. Firing at such targets will be carried out at a line of sight distance, i.e. at a distance of several tens or a couple of hundred meters. In the 40s, there was a German model of the Luftfaust portable grenade launcher. Then, during the Vietnam War, we developed the Pochatok MANPADS with unguided missiles. The current state of microelectronics and laser technology makes it possible to make small-sized missiles with laser control, using a beam, or control by wire, like an ATGM. For a UAV, a warhead in the form of linked buckshot is sufficient. You can generally try a package of small-caliber recoilless barrels, within 30 mm, firing at a distance of a couple of hundred meters with a charge of bound steel buckshot. UAV fighters, drones, can also be armed with these types of weapons. The military has stagnant thinking, well, they are not engineers.
          1. AMG
            +1
            April 25 2024 07: 47
            Small caliber 40 mm recoilless rifle, this is RPG 7.
          2. +2
            April 25 2024 08: 32
            Quote: 2112vda
            Then, during the Vietnam War, we developed the Pochatok MANPADS with unguided missiles.

            "Cob"? Don't know ! I know "Kolos"! (About “Cob” - this is, please, to N.S. Khrushchev! laughing )
            1. +2
              April 25 2024 08: 48
              I beg your pardon. Indeed "Spike".
          3. +2
            April 25 2024 14: 16
            Tied buckshot, like a “goose,” and a net that opens into a cone, similar to the type used for catching birds during banding, only with a stronger net and additional pellet weights, on the same wire-reinforced thread - I have already proposed in a similar topic. I consider this solution to be the most sane, compared to homing missiles. A drone for $600-$1200 and a rocket, 6-10 times more expensive. And then there’s a grenade launcher with special ammunition, or a rocket-propelled grenade from an ATGM. It seems easy to achieve a mesh opening cone of 15-20 meters. In any case, it’s an order of magnitude simpler than a drone homing head.
            1. +1
              April 25 2024 14: 20
              To increase efficiency - time-delayed ejection charge - with simple settings before loading, with a delay step multiple of 30-50 meters.
          4. +1
            April 26 2024 14: 51
            Quote: 2112vda
            In the 40s, there was a German model of the Luftfaust portable grenade launcher.

            It was and has proven itself to be an absolutely useless thing. When KBM started the topic of MANPADS, they immediately abandoned this direction. A person is physically unable to aim from such a system.

            Quote: 2112vda
            The current state of microelectronics and laser technology makes it possible to make small-sized missiles with laser control


            If you think that you will be able to hold a laser on a maneuverable object of 20x20 centimeters while a rocket flies towards it, then you greatly overestimate your capabilities. :) Take a camera, set the shutter speed to one minute and take a handheld photo of something a couple of kilometers away. And I assure you, you will see with your own eyes that your hands are shaking. And this is under the weight of the camera. When a jet object with a smoky exhaust does not fly out of it, drowning you with the sound of the engine and dousing you with hot gases. In this case, the shot will shift the line of sight, and you will have to look for the object in the viewfinder again. What if the drone starts maneuvering? Yes, laser designators are used on small arms, but at short distances or against large targets or generally against static ones. What I mean is that a wearable complex with beam correction will be ineffective.

            Quote: 2112vda
            Firing at such targets will be carried out at a line of sight distance, i.e. at a distance of several tens or a couple of hundred meters.

            Well, actually the line of sight is somewhat greater :) A few meters is point blank. And letting any target come to such a distance means playing even-odd. One try for everything. A long distance is not only a range, it is also the possibility of a second shot in case of a miss. And from a few meters it could fly in as debris, or even as a detonated shell... You never know what kind of self-detonation system there is.

            In my opinion, you correctly indicated the scheme, but the “implementation” of it is controversial. Laser target designation of a maneuverable flying object is a utopia. But radio command control of a small-sized missile is a proven and operational option. In Russia there are small-sized radars and OLS, and there are well-developed “framework” control systems. Gibka-S already works effectively using UAVs. But it uses homing missiles from MANPADS. The same developer has radio command systems in the Sturm complex. A complex based on something infantry and mass-produced, even an SUV, even a BMP-3, like Chrysanthemum. And cassettes of small-sized missiles with shrapnel.
            1. +1
              April 27 2024 07: 49
              My relatives who were on the contact line told me slightly different things. Anti-aircraft systems on all kinds of SUVs, infantry fighting vehicles and other Chrysanthemums are a very good target for attack drones. Yes, this technique is good for developers and capitalist manufacturers, it “cuts the budget” well. So you have to shoot down “baby hedgehogs” with an AK-74, and small things with hunting rifles. Here is a clear example of our developers trying to “shoot sparrows with cannons.” It’s clear that a cartridge with associated buckshot does not cost as much as a guided missile. In the army there is a KS carbine, the same pump-action shotgun "Lynx" and other self-loading guns. In open areas, guided missiles are probably a wonderful thing, but under trees they are nothing at all. You have to shoot back from drones everywhere.
              1. +1
                April 27 2024 15: 34
                Quote: 2112vda
                Anti-aircraft systems on all kinds of SUVs, infantry fighting vehicles and other Chrysanthemums are a very good target for attack drones.


                Well, if the system is designed to search and destroy drones, then it is a hunter. If it is NOT intended, then she is a victim. An infantry fighting vehicle is a victim, just like tanks, self-propelled guns, MLRS... And if a short-range air defense system is destroyed by a drone, then it’s a shitty air defense system.

                Quote: 2112vda
                Yes, this technique is good for developers and capitalists of manufacturers, it “cuts the budget” well.

                Yes, it's more expensive. But do you know why, for example, they started making MANPADS on “wheels”? Because application statistics, “complaints and wishes” came from the database zone (long before 2022). So often the problem was indicated that a person simply does not have time to react to the passage of a low-altitude target if he is looking for it with his eyes. A person still has a limited angle of vision and the range of visibility is also not infinite. Now, if you point your finger at him, at least “look to the left,” it’s immediately easier, but if you say “it’ll fly from the left in a minute,” it’s generally good. This is the first. And secondly...Have you seen the “packaging” of MANPADS? It is not light, and the “ammunition load” of a foot anti-aircraft gunner is not measured in dozens. Two or three maximum. If you need a long duty, then you need a vehicle with a supply of missiles. Well, here are two questions that transport answers (by the way, there were options almost with the Gazelle :) )


                Quote: 2112vda
                So you have to shoot down “baby hedgehogs” with an AK-74, and small things with hunting rifles.

                Yes, oddly enough, now the developers are looking for ammunition. Compact, efficient and suitable for mass production. Let it be buckshot, but it quickly loses its effectiveness. Don’t forget, right now in this particular conflict, armed drones are exotic, and the bulk are kamikazes. But in Syria, for example, bombers more often operated, throwing small homemade bombs or simply grenades in glasses. They did not land on our heads and did not descend below 100 meters. You won’t knock them down from a smooth-bore with buckshot. Even clay pigeon athletes don’t shoot further than 50 meters, and there the targets are specially made so that they “burst” even from one pellet. You can't get by with 12 gauge here; you need something more serious. Will you hold this most “serious” thing in your hands? Can you aim with it? Developers are forced not only to react to fire issues, but also to think about what to do next. Here you need to be realistic, the Sha has a military budget of about a trillion and they can afford to make hundreds of “armored rakes” for a million bucks apiece, and then simply abandon them in Afghanistan as unnecessary. Our developers do not have such budgets. They cannot do something that will become useless in a month.

                Quote: 2112vda
                It’s clear that a cartridge with associated buckshot does not cost as much as a guided missile.

                I repeat to you, we have tried to make systems with NURS and grenades. A person with such a system is not able to manage effectively. The Germans found this out during the Second World War, and ours confirmed it. Buckshot from a gun, with all the tricks, does not fly with destructive force further than 200 meters horizontally, and the “tied buckshot” promoted to you, according to the manufacturer, remains effective for no more than 90 meters. The drones will rise higher, what will you do?


                And you are wrong to talk about rocket prices. The Malyutka ATGM did not have a single active element on board, just a pair of diodes and capacitors. A guided missile here is needed the size of a stick of smoked sausage. Computations on the PU side. Don't confuse them with homing missiles. There is no need for complex electronics or “artificial intelligence”; the most difficult thing is the kinematics of the steering wheels. The engine is a gunpowder bomb.

                Quote: 2112vda
                In open areas, guided missiles are probably a wonderful thing, but under trees they are nothing at all.


                Yeah. Apparently, flying through the thickets, buckshot only becomes more effective. :)
                Moreover, your “connected” one. ATGMs are somehow used both in vegetation and in urban conditions.
  2. +2
    April 25 2024 05: 43
    It is irrational to rely on fragments against UAVs. They should be destroyed by a blast wave.

    Missiles against UAVs are analogues of ancient anti-tank missiles with a high-explosive warhead instead of a cumulative one. The mass of the rocket and land mine are determined by the detonation distance achieved. Problems with radio control are solved very simply.

    Options for kinetic destruction or an analogue of a shrapnel projectile with small shot are possible. But the first requires software improvements, and the second is simply more expensive.
    1. 0
      April 25 2024 05: 55
      Quote: also a doctor
      It is irrational to rely on fragments against UAVs. They should be destroyed by a blast wave.

      Well, why, you can also use shrapnel.
      1. 0
        April 25 2024 14: 37
        I wrote about shrapnel, read the post to the end. However, with equal weight, a landmine close to a UAV will be more effective than any shrapnel.
    2. +1
      April 25 2024 17: 40
      The radius of action of the blast wave is orders of magnitude smaller than the radius of action of fragments or GGE. To destroy a UAV with a blast wave, you need a fairly large explosive charge and a close detonation distance.
  3. -1
    April 25 2024 05: 54
    It is strange that to combat small attack drones they do not use blinding laser systems to “burn out” the optical matrices of the seeker or television guidance heads, as is done on aircraft protection systems
    1. 0
      April 25 2024 08: 55
      Kamikaze drones do not have any homing heads (this is a propaganda fantasy); they have ordinary digital or thermal imaging cameras and are guided by operators sitting tens of kilometers away.
      1. +1
        April 25 2024 12: 27
        Quote: bug120560
        Kamikaze drones do not have any homing heads (this is a propaganda fantasy); they have ordinary digital or thermal imaging cameras and are guided by operators sitting tens of kilometers away.

        One of the latest developments on FPV drones is a TV camera that can remember the target and attack on its own. Soon there will be drones capable of searching for a target without the participation of an operator. But svp67 correctly recalled the development of laser devices, which at one time were developed to disable optical devices: TV cameras, optical sights and the eyes of operators looking into these sights.
        1. -2
          April 25 2024 14: 40
          Your fantasies run ahead, are unrealizable and therefore harmful. They distract from creating real weapons. It’s like Shoigu has been stroking his vanity for 15 years with pseudo-robots who don’t have wedge heels. But they don’t exist and won’t exist for another 30 years.
          It would be better if I bought Chinese quadcopters with this money, it would be even more useful. Or factories for the production of components and materials of these quadcopters....
          1. 0
            April 25 2024 19: 17
            Shoigu’s pride has nothing to do with “under-wedge heels”, since, I believe, he does not take any direct part in their creation. As in all other projects. Products are tested in combat conditions. That's all...
            But “pseudo-robots” have proven themselves well as engineering vehicles for mine clearance, evacuation of the wounded, and delivery of ammunition to LBS. Mini quadcopters are not capable of this.
      2. 0
        April 26 2024 11: 53
        Quote: bug120560
        Kamikaze drones do not have any homing heads (this is a propaganda fantasy)

        That's why they are available on third-generation ATGMs.
  4. +4
    April 25 2024 07: 27
    For now - as a temporary solution, I would suggest the following. Take Murka with a 750 barrel. It’s much more convenient, even though it’s a hefty oar. And load with different cartridges. For example, the first one is in a container that opens to a hundred meters. These are already on sale. Next - at 70. Then - the usual at 50. Well, and lastly - just buckshot without a container. Thus, when shooting, you can create a field of grapeshot at different distances, at least something will hit..

    If you screw an extended magazine onto Murka, you will get two cartridges of each type one after the other. It seems to me that the probability of being shot down in this situation will be significantly higher..
    1. +2
      April 25 2024 09: 06
      If you don’t set the unthinkable task of shooting down a UAV, for example, with missiles of the 19Ya6 type somewhere 8-10 km away. (it’s not even clear how to detect them there at altitudes up to 20m), but let’s just focus on protecting a point object the size of a tank or dugout from drones at a distance of 50-200m, a robotic anti-aircraft gun will cope with this task, machine vision plus automated aiming will allow you to notice in time target and hit with confidence, and 5.45 caliber is enough for a drone.
      1. +2
        April 25 2024 09: 10
        This still needs to be created and put into service, and Murka with the appropriate cartridges should be sent to the troops right now. I'm saying - as a temporary solution. And to machine gun even a small drone with eight grapeshot charges from a semi-automatic machine at 100 meters does not require any special shooting skills..
      2. 0
        April 25 2024 14: 45
        at 50 meters a dozen rounds of ammunition will be enough, but at 200 meters the magazine will not be enough to guarantee a kill. Requires AGS with timer detonation.
  5. +3
    April 25 2024 09: 42
    We’ve already discussed... we’ve discussed... and now it’s “twenty-five” again! By the way, among the “tiny” missiles listed in the article, MNTK (USA) is missing! Anti-drone missiles are not a bad solution and have the right to be implemented! If some commentators consider such a solution too expensive, then these are his “cockroaches”! (With the mass equipping of troops with UAVs, a response will be needed in the form of mass equipment of units with anti-drone missiles, and this will reduce the price of one piece of such products! And yet... maybe it’s enough to save on the price of new weapons, paying for it “at exorbitant prices” with the lives of your soldiers?) Although you can consider simpler and cheaper options, but quite effective! (to be continued... )
    1. 0
      April 25 2024 17: 25
      PS Although you can consider simpler and cheaper options, they are quite effective! For example, consider first of all not zuras, but interceptor drones, launched “from hand”! Or use, instead of (along with) anti-missile missiles, under-barrel grenades of the GPR-1 type in an anti-drone version (fragmentation beams, shrapnel) or the “reanimated” “Spike”, the 20-mm missiles of which are comparable in power to 30-mm anti-aircraft shells! Here you can have fun with fragmentation-beam and shrapnel “options”! It is possible to use a proximity radio frequency fuse in one of the 37 missiles (concept: “master” - “slave”) At the same time, “Kolos” is an excellent grenade launcher with a range of up to 7 km and armor-piercing up to 2 mm! You can add cumulative “missile shells” with armor-piercing up to 10 mm to the ammunition load!
  6. +4
    April 25 2024 11: 21
    The problem of countering small UAVs needs to be divided into two parts.
    1. Counteraction to reconnaissance/correction drones
    2.Counteracting FPV-kamikaze
    These are completely different goals in their characteristics, and accordingly, we need to fight them with different tools. If mini/micro missiles are suitable for the former, then the latter obviously need ballistic/barrel systems that hit the FPV in line-of-sight conditions. For the latter, the distance is 2 km. redundant.
  7. +1
    April 25 2024 14: 47
    Anti-aircraft guns were abandoned due to the emergence of supersonic targets, which results in an unacceptably high consumption of ammunition to hit a single target. The use of small, highly mobile artillery with programmable shell detonation against such targets is just right. Rocket is expensive.
  8. 0
    April 25 2024 15: 52
    Well, mass-produced models use civilian ones, so the frequencies are also standardized. What prevents you from assembling a jammer with a range of 200 meters?
    1. 0
      April 25 2024 21: 14
      Quote: evgen1221
      What prevents you from assembling a jammer with a range of 200 meters?

      These are the ones that are now being supplied en masse. And they work poorly because both we and the enemy shift frequencies. In addition, they began to use additional optical correction, when the drone itself is directed to a selected location or target using its own camera. A jammer will not help with such things. Well, there are drones with frequency converters, like the Lancet, which are expensive, but you can’t jam them, even finding the frequency is a problem.

      In general, micro-air defense will have a lot of work to do on the modern battlefield. Scattered...
  9. 0
    April 25 2024 18: 53
    There is no need to invent anything here. There are already electronic warfare of any power and direction. Train soldiers to use it - you will be happy. And not all sorts of barreled types of anti-aircraft guns....
  10. -2
    April 25 2024 18: 58
    What to do with childhood? - just an AK and a keen eye
  11. 0
    April 26 2024 17: 59
    MANPADS are a bit expensive and not very effective. Why not use the same kamikaze drones and fighter drones with drop nets against drones? Cheap, simple and cheerful
    1. 0
      April 26 2024 21: 03
      First you need to detect a drone in the sky, and then somehow aim a fighter with a net at it, this will not be easy at all, it will become relatively simple when they understand that you don’t need to chase every drone in the sky, you need to fight off a specific drone that has approached you to a dangerous distance, that is, you need a short-range charger, and it doesn’t matter what it will shoot with buckshot, bullets or even nets, the main thing is that it shoots itself without your participation
  12. 0
    April 29 2024 05: 32
    ready-made army model on a drone. why invent something? thermobaric. fragmentation, etc.