The Ministry of Defense showed footage of the destruction of the Ukrainian Su-25 attack aircraft by the Lancet kamikaze drone at the Dolgintsevo airfield

The Russian Ministry of Defense showed footage of the destruction of the Ukrainian Su-25 attack aircraft at the Dolgintsevo airfield in the Dnepropetrovsk region. As the military department clarified, the plane was destroyed by Lancet loitering ammunition.

The destruction of two Air Force aircraft of the Ukrainian Armed Forces at the airfield was mentioned in the new report of the Ministry of Defense over the past day, but there was no additional information. Later, the military department posted a video on the Internet with footage of the destruction of the Ukrainian Su-25 attack aircraft. As it turned out, he was hit while parked at the Dolgintsevo airfield in the Dnepropetrovsk region.

As a result of a direct hit, the Ukrainian Su-25 aircraft was destroyed. The destruction of the aircraft is confirmed by objective monitoring footage.

- the report says.

Judging by the footage, the Lancet was guided to the target by a reconnaissance UAV, and he took the hit drone-kamikaze on the plane, and also carried out objective control of the target hit, recording a fire after arrival. What’s noteworthy is that before our drone attacked, this Su-25 was refueled, apparently in preparation for takeoff. At the very beginning of the video, you can clearly see how a car, most likely a tanker, drives away from him.

Ukrainian resources claim that Russian reconnaissance drones have long since learned to operate behind Ukrainian troops, flying to a fairly great depth, guiding them to targets missiles or kamikaze drones.

Comments

[Orange bigg]

I wonder how far Lancet covered, how many kilometers there are from the line of combat contact to Krivoy Rog?

[shin]

The Lancet loitering munition can be used for both strike and reconnaissance missions, has a maximum flight range of 40-50 km, depending on the version (the latest developments are supposedly 60-70 km) and a maximum take-off weight (MTOW) of about 12 kg

[Orange bigg]

Lancet-3 has a damage radius of more than 70 km, but how much more is unknown. From the same Dolgintsevo airport to the nearest line of combat contact along the Dnieper is at least 70 km.

[shin]

I repeat, it all depends on the generation (model) of the ammunition used. And the main thing is their availability. Under certain circumstances, sabotage and reconnaissance units could
use the old model "Lancet 1" to launch the munition using a small ground catapult. Fortunately, the weight is small, "Lancet-1" is equipped with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead weighing 1 kg. Its takeoff weight is only 5 kg. can spend up to 40 minutes in the air, and reconnaissance UAVs, such as "Orlans", guide it to the target. In war, you can do anything.

[Pete mitchell]

Quote: golen

In war they can use all sorts of chemicals.

The main thing is not to interfere...

[dmi.pris1]

I hope it wasn’t a model. He stood there too carefree...

[Orange bigg]

Definitely not a mock-up. Mock-ups are not refueled. I wonder how much the Lancet’s damage radius will increase if it is launched not from a catapult from the ground, but let’s create an air-launched modification and launch it from the same Orion-RU UAV?

Judging by the footage, the Lancet was aimed at the target by a reconnaissance drone, which filmed the kamikaze drone hitting the plane, and also carried out objective monitoring of the target’s destruction, recording the fire after arrival. What's remarkable is Before our drone attacked, this Su-25 was refueled, apparently in preparation for takeoff. At the very beginning of the video, you can clearly see how a car, most likely a tanker, drives away from him.

[Orange bigg]

If in this way it is possible to launch the Lancet at least 100 km, along the damage radius like the UMPB, then there will be a problem, especially against Patriot-type air defense.

[Enceladus]

Quote: OrangeBigg

It’s interesting how much the Lancet’s damage radius will increase if it is launched not from a catapult from the ground, but let’s say create an air-launched modification and launch it from the same Orion-RU UAV?

Not at all... UAVs are subsonic, they reach cruising speed quickly. Therefore, either the carrier will fly closer - or there will be no point. it is cheaper to lose a UAV than its carrier

[voyaka uh]

"Mock-ups are not refueled" ///
---
They definitely fill it up.
But not with kerosene, of course, but with some kind of diesel fuel.
The barrel is inside for the smoke and fire to come out.

[Aviator_]

I hope it wasn't a mock-up.

I hope so too - why would a tanker drive away from a wooden model?

[dmi.pris1]

The departing car is too small for a tanker. And pay attention to the gap and what follows.

[75 Sergey]

It flared up normally, a living plane!

[Ham59]

MO, where are the hangars? (C) Stop, this is different.
This was a layout (C)

[BorzRio]

They got here like that. And no “nearby, it still hurt” and so on. Right on target. That's how it should be. This is the result. Super.

[rasl_iz_pitera]

They strike and strike and there is no end in sight. What will happen to the F16, will it take 100 years to amaze?! and then after 100 years what? F32

[Maxim]

Yeah, three hundred no less, you and the military coop know better from the perch

[Fizorg]

Quote from: dmi.pris1

I hope it wasn’t a model. He stood there too carefree...

I agree, this can’t happen in Nenka. In Nenka, everything is in hangars, because the Ukrainians are descendants of the Sumerians, and therefore smart, and there was no need to get involved, otherwise Kyiv would be in three days, and there are red lines, and the toothless authorities are afraid of using nuclear weapons, and the children are in Yuesei...
In short, this is a layout.

[Alex Starley]

Well, even if it is a model, then such a model of an airplane obviously costs more than a lancet)

[Yuri EVRAZ]

It depends on which way you look at it. Maybe it was aircraft junk. They pulled it from a landfill, painted it and off they went.

[Alex Starley]

Well, yes, and the car that was driving away is a group for painting, and he thinks, damn, it’s a shame, they just painted it and here you go)

[Yuri EVRAZ]

The movement at the airfield must be depicted to make it look realistic. They will still hit the plane

[alexoff]

Brotherly people, they don’t build hangars either. At least some benefit

[km-21]

The losses of Ukrainian aircraft are absolutely not critical for the Anglo-Saxons (who are behind the Ukrainians). But for their part, the Anglo-Saxons (at the hands of the same Ukrainians) are methodically damaging or destroying strategically important Russian infrastructure.

First of all, these are oil refineries, petroleum product storage facilities, missile attack warning radars, aircraft stationed at airfields, including the latest Su-57 fighters and long-range bombers, and ships of the Black Sea Fleet.

Moreover, this trend is rapidly worsening. In the very near future, it is quite realistic to expect an attack on Russian nuclear power plants (for example, the Chernobyl-type RBMK reactor is operating in Kursk). It’s also not at all difficult to stuff a drone with radioactive dirt and turn Russian cities into ghost towns.

Well, Russians, how long will we chew snot?

[Dart2027]

Quote: km-21

The losses of Ukrainian aircraft are absolutely not critical for the Anglo-Saxons (who are behind the Ukrainians).

That’s why they are in no hurry to hand over theirs.

[Yuri L]

While absolute cowards sent here are in power in the Russian Federation, whose money and children are in the same West, enemy to us and friendly to them, we will continue to chew. We are not snot, but His, my dear, they are American chewing gum, watching on the screen is interesting for them and the Western elite (of which they are still a part) a performance called Strange Military Operation.

[75 Sergey]

It doesn’t matter what type of reactor it operates, you’re not Russian, why are you scared?!
The Internet has been turned on for you again...

[Sergey Averchenkov]

It looks like there was a fuel spill - most likely not a mockup. Very poor resolution.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Do the jingoistic patriots even guess what state this airfield is in now? Admire it.



It is absolutely not suitable for receiving and basing aircraft.
Again, Konashenkov’s department produces noodles. However, after they destroyed the Su-24 at the heliport, there is nothing to be surprised about.

[75 Sergey]

.what is the current state of this airfield?

Don’t blame the misinformation, why are you showing old pictures, it’s summer, and you have winter, the stump is clear, you managed to play tricks - you’re waiting for the F-16.

You can't fool us with chaff!

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Don’t blame the misinformation, why are you showing old pictures, it’s summer, and you have winter, the stump is clear, you managed to play tricks - you’re waiting for the F-16.

Young man, do you have any idea what it means to “bewitch” an airfield that has not been properly maintained for decades?
And who will restore an airfield 70 km from the front, when after the USSR in Ukraine there are no airfields like a fool's shag.
Use your brains at least a little and check the information.

[75 Sergey]

This is the original!
Well done, the plane was clearly alive!

[Ingvar7401]

Why one, why not the whole airfield?

[Master 2030]

Some kind of response for the Su-57?
Ceterum censeo Washingtago delendam esse

[UAZ 452]

Su-25 for Su-57? It’s hard to call this an adequate “response.” However, we categorically deny the defeat of the Su-57.

[Fizorg]

Quote: UAZ 452

Su-25 for Su-57? It’s hard to call this an adequate “response.” However, we categorically deny the defeat of the Su-57.

Moreover, it is denied both at the official level and in the blogosphere