PDW vs. Drones: Personal Defense Weapons in a New Quality

102
PDW vs. Drones: Personal Defense Weapons in a New Quality

Submachine gun (SMG) vs. drones?

It would seem absurd, but it is not that simple. Below we will consider a number of facts, and then try to formulate a concept for the application of such weapons against kamikaze unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or more precisely, primarily against numerous FPV drones.



Uzi (Uzi)


About 20-25 years ago, the author happened to read in one of the weapons magazines history development and use of Uzi submachine guns by the Israeli company IMI in various armed forces and security agencies. One of the users of the Uzi submachine gun from 1960 to 1990 was the US Secret Service, which provided security for US presidents and vice presidents.

According to the information published in that magazine, at a certain point in time, one of the leaders of the US Secret Service purchased a huge batch of expired 9x19 mm cartridges “cheaply” and began using them for intensive training of Secret Service agents – the possible presence of delays in this case is not so critical.


PP Uzi

There was ammo to spare, and no restrictions on its consumption, as a result of which some agents became so skilled in using the Uzi submachine gun that they managed to shoot clay pigeons (sporting clays) out of them.

This suggests that submachine guns have the potential to engage high-speed, small-sized targets, albeit in the hands of highly skilled shooters.

Unfortunately, not all magazines from that period have been scanned and digitized, so the author was unable to find the above-mentioned article, and therefore there is no way to say for sure whether it was talking about full-size Uzi SMGs with a rate of fire of 600-950 rounds per minute or Mini-Uzi with a rate of fire of 1200-1500 rounds per minute.

Why are two rates of fire listed for one PP? This is for firing with the bolt open and closed, so we can assume that Secret Service agents used the maximum rate of fire for shooting at clay pigeons.


PP Mini-Uzi

It is also worth noting that for the 9x19 mm cartridge, the Uzi PP has a fairly high weight - 3,5 kilograms for the full-size Uzi PP and 2,7 kilograms for the Mini-Uzi PP, which reduces the convenience of carrying, but allows you to significantly reduce recoil and control the weapon during shooting.

Glock-18 and APS


The rate of fire of most automatic small arms is at the level of 700-900 rounds per minute, is it possible to do more?

Yes, the specified rate of fire is set as such not because it cannot be made higher from a design point of view - on the contrary, often increasing the speed of moving parts will only lead to an increase in the weapon's resistance to contamination, although the weapon will "break" more.

The choice of rate of fire is primarily determined by the need for the fighter to maintain control over his weapon - ensuring the necessary accuracy and precision of fire, as well as the effective consumption of ammunition.

For example, the Austrian Glock-18 pistol chambered for 9x19 mm cartridges, which has a fully automatic fire mode, has a rate of fire of 1200 rounds per minute, while the Soviet Stechkin Automatic Pistol (APS) chambered for 9x18 mm cartridges has a rate of fire of 700-750 rounds per minute due to a built-in rate-of-fire slowing mechanism.


Shooting from Glock-18 and APS

The Nikonov AN-94 assault rifle, model 1987 (Abakan theme), in the two-shot burst mode, has a rate of fire of 1800 rounds per minute, resulting in two bullets firing practically one after the other.

PDW


The PDW (personal defense weapon) concept is a term used in Western countries to describe light and compact weapons intended for use by "second-line" military personnel - combat vehicle crews, artillery crews, etc., who, due to the nature of their service, do not require "full-size" small arms such as machine guns or assault rifles, but who may need more firepower than pistols can provide.

Globally, there is nothing new in the PDW concept - essentially, these are the same submachine guns, but with ammunition optimized for hitting targets protected by personal body armor (PB).

In Russia, for this purpose, they simply developed armor-piercing cartridges for existing submachine guns for 9x19 mm cartridges, as well as for the domestic reinforced 9x21 mm cartridge. In addition, the most popular PDW in Russia is still the AKS-74U assault rifle, made on the basis of the standard Kalashnikov assault rifle, for the standard 5,45x39 mm cartridge.


PP SR-2 (SR.2) "Veresk" caliber 9x21 mm from TsNIITochMash

However, thanks to the requests and tenders held within the framework of the PDW theme, several interesting ammunition and weapons designed for them have appeared in the West.

In particular, the PDW concept is largely associated with the Belgian FN Herstal P90 submachine gun chambered for 5,7x28 mm and the German Heckler & Koch MP7 A1 PDW submachine gun chambered for 4,6x30 mm.

A distinctive feature of the 5,7x28 mm and 4,6x30 mm cartridges is the use of small-caliber bullets in combination with the energy of 9x19 mm and larger caliber cartridges, which allows for greater armor penetration, albeit at the potential cost of less stopping power.


FN P90 SMG, MP7 A1 SMG (top) and FN Five-seveN 5,7x28mm pistols (bottom)

True, there is still no final opinion on the issue of stopping action - the author considered this issue in October 2019 in the material Stop cannot be killed. Where to put a comma?, and in terms of small-caliber ammunition, everything is not as clear-cut as it seems.

But let's return to the PDW - the 4,6x30 mm cartridge and weapons for it have not become widespread, while the 5,7x28 mm cartridge feels quite good, not only the above-mentioned FN P90 submachine gun and the FN Five-seveN pistol are produced for it, but also a number of other models - even Ukraine has distinguished itself here with its Fort-28 pistol of 5,7x28 mm caliber.

If you look at sources in the US, you get the feeling that the main factor holding back the spread of weapons chambered for 5,7x28 mm is the high cost of both the cartridge itself and the weapon chambered for it. Among the advantages of weapons chambered for 5,7x28 mm, users highlight its multi-charge capability, low recoil, high accuracy and shooting density – the cartridge is low-impulse.

Another interesting powerful small-caliber ammunition, not directly related to the PDW concept, is the .22 WMR (Winchester Magnum Rimfire) 5,6x34 mm cartridge - essentially an extended 22 Long Rifle "small-bore" 5,6x15,6 mm cartridge.

What is the main advantage of small-caliber ammunition developed within the framework of the PDW theme (and not only)?

This is a high power-to-small-size ratio, allowing for the creation of accurate, multi-shot, and compact weapons. For example, the standard magazine of the Kel-Tec PMR-30 pistol holds 30 rounds of .22 WMR (the extended one holds even more), and the magazine of the FN P90 submachine gun holds 50 rounds.


Kel-Tec PMR-30 with standard magazine


Kel-Tec PMR-30 with extended magazine

The 50-round magazine from the FN P90 submachine gun is also used for the Kel-Tec P50 5,7x28mm pistol.


Kel-Tec P50 pistol

Now let's get back to our reality.

PDW vs Drones


In October 2019, the author published the material A promising army pistol based on the PDW concept, which examined the advantages of powerful small-caliber cartridges for an army pistol and the feasibility of developing a domestic “weapon-cartridge” complex, to which the following requirements were imposed:

1. As ammunition, a small-caliber cartridge with a bullet of the caliber 5-7 mm (maximum dimensions of the cartridge 8x40 mm), with a carbide bullet and an initial energy of 400-600 J should be used.

2. The main mode of operation should be firing in short bursts of two rounds, with a rate of 1700-2000 rounds per minute.

3. The magazine capacity should be 26-30 cartridges.

The basis could be the domestic OTs-23 "Drotik" pistol chambered for 5,45x18 mm, which has an automatic fire mode with a cutoff of three rounds, with a rate of fire of 1700 rounds per minute, modified for a conditional reinforced 5,45x30 mm cartridge.



How effective could a promising military pistol based on the PDW concept be against FPV drones?

Currently, 12-gauge shotgun shells with 00-0000 pellets are used quite effectively against FPV drones, where each 12-gauge shell contains about 60 pellets, that is, one 12-gauge shell contains more pellets than a pistol magazine designed according to the PDW concept.

On the other hand, for work against FPV drones, the Techcrim company has developed the Perekhvat-S anti-drone munition, caliber 12/70, which includes 6 lead striking elements connected by a Kevlar thread.


Also in the previous material we talked about homemade fragmentation ammunition for the standard 5,45x39 mm Kalashnikov assault rifle cartridge and the possibility of industrial production of such cartridges with a corresponding improvement in their characteristics.

Potentially, there are no obstacles to using cartridges with fragmenting striking elements for weapons developed according to the PDW concept. The same conventional 5,45x30 mm cartridge may well include two or three bullets located sequentially in a container that opens after firing, or without one.

Of course, their muzzle energy will be lower than that of a single bullet, but we don’t need to penetrate bulletproof vests, do we? The possibility of coupling bullets using the same Kevlar thread is questionable – it is unknown how the coupled rotating bullets will behave after the container is opened.


Vanguard V57 5,7x28mm cartridge and an example of a fragmentation ammunition with interlocked striking elements based on it

What do we end up with when combining a pistol or submachine gun developed in accordance with the PDW concept and fragmentation ammunition?

Such a weapon should be very "nimble", it should be easy to aim at fast-moving FPV drones, it will have a fairly low recoil when firing "twos" in automatic mode.

Presumably, a trained fighter will be able to fire twice in 1-2 seconds, sending 4-6 striking elements, possibly linked by a Kevlar thread, towards the FPV drone. A magazine with a capacity of 30-50 rounds will contain from 60-90 to 100-150 striking elements and, accordingly, will allow for 15 to 25 paired shots.

Such a weapon, especially in the format of a full-size pistol, will be very compact and can be carried by fighters in a holster on the hip. In addition to working against FPV drones, it can be used in close combat against enemy manpower.

Is it possible to implement a similar weapon based on existing 9mm submachine guns?

Potentially yes, but the efficiency will be lower - the weapon's mass is greater, the recoil impulse is greater, the ammunition is smaller. Of course, in a larger cartridge it is theoretically possible to place more striking elements, but if they are placed sequentially, then you will get "pancakes" with terrible aerodynamics, and if they are placed in parallel, then they will be scattered by centrifugal force due to the rotation caused by the rifling of the barrel.

There are two options to work on - a weapon with a smooth barrel, a kind of "pistol-submachine gun-shotgun" or elements linked by Kevlar threads, perhaps they will not fly apart, but will continue to move towards the target, rotating around the axis of the shot direction - all these options can only be tested in full-scale tests.


An example of a fragmenting striking element for a 9x21 mm cartridge with 4 and 8 quadrant striking elements - all this will be difficult to manufacture and much less reliable than 2-3 consecutive cylindrical submunitions in a small-caliber cartridge

Another point is that weapons for low-impulse, small-caliber cartridges have relatively small dimensions and weight, significantly less than a shotgun, their automation is usually based on the operation of a free or semi-free bolt.

Potentially, based on the above-discussed concept of an anti-drone pistol/submachine gun, an under-barrel anti-drone module weighing about one kilogram (with cartridges) could be created, designed for mounting on a standard weapon instead of an under-barrel grenade launcher or shotgun.

This solution has both pros and cons. On the one hand, there is no need to carry a separate weapon, you can use the standard sights, on the other hand, the standard weapon will become heavier, it will not have the same "agility" as a separate pistol / submachine gun, it will be more difficult to reload.

Conclusions


It is a pity that the concept of pistols for powerful small-caliber cartridges has not been developed in our country, in many ways this is a consequence of the lack of a civilian market for rifled short-barreled weapons. For the military, a pistol is a secondary thing, so, apparently, no one has particularly bothered with this topic.

It is a pity that such an interesting pistol as the OTs-23 "Drotik" was forgotten and abandoned. It is possible that in the "motherland's storehouses" there are other developments of small arms and ammunition that were not relevant then, but could be in demand in a modern war.

There is no doubt that the development of a personal self-defense weapon within the PDW concept, which can be effective both against enemy manpower at close range and against FPV drones, including the development of new ammunition, is not a matter of one month or even a year, and it will take even more time to deploy serial production.

So, for now we don’t have an alternative to shotguns, and it’s true that there aren’t really any shotguns in the troops either, but if you want to, it’s something that can be acquired, for example, like what happened with the airplane shelters: they didn’t build them, they didn’t build them, and then something happened, and construction sort of started.

Perhaps the same will happen with shotguns, and perhaps a promising military pistol based on the PDW concept will someday be in demand.
102 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    11 January 2025 05: 56
    For starters, it would be good to re-equip the front line fighters from Kalashnikovs to balanced assault rifles like the AEK 971. The problem with the Kalashnikovs is their low accuracy when firing in bursts. For a slow-moving large target like a person (compared to a drone), the accuracy is normal. But for defense against drones, it needs to be much higher.
    The main thing is not to carry anything extra. And after a little training with plates, you can achieve good results with drones.
    1. +5
      11 January 2025 07: 02
      The problem with the Kalashnikov is its low accuracy when firing in bursts. For a slow-moving large target like a person (compared to a drone), the accuracy is normal. But for defense against drones, it needs to be much higher.

      I wonder why hunters shoot fast but small targets like birds with shot with a dispersion cone of ~45 degrees, and not with a jacan with a dispersion equal to zero? Probably they haven't read smart books on ballistics. recourse
      1. +6
        11 January 2025 09: 19
        At a distance of 30m the dispersion cone of shot #7 (for example) is 3 meters. You say 45 degrees? You probably read that in smart books on ballistics?
        Well, the principle of shooting bullets from a machine gun and shot from a rifle are slightly different. To compare them so directly. Otherwise, drones would be shot down with Kalashnikovs with low accuracy and guns would not be asked to go to the front.
        1. -6
          11 January 2025 09: 53
          They themselves don't know what they're asking for. Sometimes it's garage electronic warfare, and now it's guns with cartridges and plates.
        2. +10
          11 January 2025 12: 25
          Personally, after purchasing my gun, I methodically shot it with different shot at different distances: 20, 30 and 50 meters and with different attachments (choke, semi-choke, cylinder). I counted the hits, determined the dispersion circle with a more or less dense scattering (subjectively of course) to hit a duck or a goose, having previously counted the number of pellets in each cartridge - I shot shot No. 7,5 24 gr sporting, No. 5 44 gr magnum, No. 3 36 gr container, No. 1 44 gr magnum. I entered the data in a table. I did painstaking and rather tedious work to understand how my gun shoots. Therefore, I am completely confident in my data. So, at a distance of 30 meters, the dispersion circle, for example, of #1 44 gr shot (magnum) is 80-90 cm. Depending on the attachment, from 68% of pellets (choke) to 37% of pellets (cylinder) fall into this circle. At a distance of 50 meters, the dispersion circle was 90 cm with 15 to 25% falling into this circle depending on the attachment. It is possible that 100% of pellets really fall into a 3 meter circle, as you wrote, but the scattering is very thin and the shot is not reliable.
          1. 0
            11 January 2025 21: 23
            Quote: Slon1978
            Personally, after purchasing my gun, I methodically shot it with different pellets at different distances.
            Whose cartridges did you take? Was the pattern uniform?
            1. +1
              13 January 2025 00: 26
              The cartridges, of course, were from different manufacturers, which I was able to buy in the store by the time of the test shooting. I outlined a more or less uniform part of the shot pattern in a circle, the diameter of which I measured and entered into the table. Then I counted the holes in the circle. Outside the circle there were, naturally, individual and sometimes small-group (3-4 pellets) holes, but they did not affect the change in the circle.
          2. 0
            12 January 2025 02: 16
            I gave the example with 3 meters because the previous "amateur" claimed that the shot from the barrel flies out in a 45 degree cone.
        3. 0
          13 January 2025 11: 58
          At 30 meters, bird shot no longer kills, but only wounds... mostly. But steel is even lower. So a cylinder at 15-20 meters will be just right.. But you need to learn how to shoot at a moving target and it costs at least tens of hundreds of rounds..
    2. -3
      11 January 2025 07: 08
      At one time, the low accuracy of fire from a Kalashnikov was considered a big plus.
      Now, however, they write about it as a problem.
      Everything is changing.
      1. +4
        11 January 2025 10: 18
        He has a normal pile. At least - acceptable. If you shoot with a good cartridge, and not our gross one.
      2. 0
        11 January 2025 21: 25
        Quote: sagitovich
        At one time, the low accuracy of fire from a Kalashnikov was considered a big plus.
        When the Americans fired at the Kalash with their own cartridges, the accuracy was no worse than the M-16, despite the operation of the bolt carrier.
    3. +4
      11 January 2025 19: 50
      Have you held this AEK in your hands? Have you shot it? Judging by the comment, no. Well, screw it.
      1. -1
        12 January 2025 02: 18
        Look at the "military acceptance" about balanced automation. The logic is very simple. The less recoil, the easier it is to hit a target such as a drone.
        1. 0
          14 January 2025 01: 29
          It is immediately obvious that you do not understand the subject, that you have a low level of engineering analysis and/or lack of personal experience shooting from these "balanced" (in quotes) machine guns.

          Let's figure it out: The recoil, and as a result the accuracy of automatic fire, is affected by:
          (1) the recoil from the process of the bullet passing through the barrel - this leads to both a displacement of the barrel axis and to transverse-perpendicular-lateral vibration of the barrel
          (2) BGD, that is, "Lateral Gas Propeller" - it creates transverse-perpendicular-lateral bending moments and vibrations
          (3) impact of the bolt carrier on the butt plate

          And so, google the diagram of "balanced" machines,(Google: wiki: "Abakan competition") and what do we see?. And we see that problem (3) is somehow solved there, and they don’t even remember about (2) and (1), but it is they that cause the greatest vibration and barrel drift.

          Do you know what is the funniest and saddest thing? The fact that no one needs this balance today, even if: I, you or someone else, create an "ideal machine gun" (without any recoil at all), then neither the Russian Ministry of Defense, nor the military-industrial complex corporations (the same Kalashnikov concern), you and I will not be paid for innovation. Even if we file a patent, no one needs it, since "a patent protects the manufacturer, only the manufacturer, and no one except the manufacturer, if you are not a manufacturer, and cannot become one within a limited time, then a patent does not protect you in any way, because a patent is a means of monopolization, not monetization of innovations."
          1. -2
            14 January 2025 07: 44
            Theorists.
            In the Military Acceptance everything is perfectly shown what and how.
            There are all the conversations and examples about increased accuracy when firing bursts. But you pompously and with disdain for your interlocutor manage to theorize that this does not and cannot be. Finish school first and learn to communicate, ignoramus.
            1. 0
              15 January 2025 04: 29
              Correct laboratory test-trial-experiment:
              1) we arrive at the shooting range,
              2) We hang the machine from the ceiling on two vertical ropes, from both ends of the machine, so that the machine can swing back and forth and left and right like on a rope swing.
              3) we install a "remote trigger mechanism" (RTM)
              4) we record the following videos, we record the videos from three sides (view from the right or left side, view from above, and view from behind), the camera position should be the same, the video should have the same background of black and white squares of a fixed size.
              4.1) video with the activation of the DMNK, without a shot
              4.2) video with single shooting
              4.3) video with automatic shooting throughout the entire magazine
              5) you post all of this on the internet on YouTube and put the link under this post
              6) From the rolling of the machine in the video we see all the flaws of the balanced automation!

              Why this hemorrhoid? And then, "shooting accuracy" depends on: и "from the recoil of the weapon" и "from how the shooter stands" и "from how the shooter holds the weapon", that is, a professional shooter, yes, on the range, yes, in an ideal stance, yes, in an ideal grip, will shoot accurately even with an old AK-47, BUT, the same shooter, in a real fight, on the move, from unstable positions, will miss catastrophically, and the test described above allows us to exclude all factors associated with the shooter, the fight and the weakened low-impulse cartridge.

              What do the videos deceive and not tell you, including the military acceptance project?
              (BUT)Yes, in that they use a classic polygon, the shooter puts his leg back, puts his back at an angle forward, leans on the stand in front, and also uses a low-impulse intermediate cartridge. Only in a real fight there is none of this laughing
              (B)problem: the gas chamber and gas drive in it are shifted further back from the front edge of the barrel, because of this: the opening of the bolt begins earlier, therefore: more powder gases fly into the receiver, especially when using a silencer-PBBS-cans and similar devices.
              (AT)AEK is much more complicated, because it has more parts and they are more complex in shape, therefore it is more expensive to manufacture, and more difficult and time-consuming to clean.
              1. 0
                15 January 2025 07: 25
                Oh, you are such theorists at VO. Did you really finish school?
                I can also come up with a ton of different tests. Take a dynamometer between the shoulder and the butt. Hang accelerometers on every part of the machine gun, including 10 on the barrel. Take 10 shooters with different experience and 10 different types of cartridges, conduct 10 different types of shooting with thousands of cartridges. Get a terabyte of data and set up tons of graphs and tables.
                So what? What for in this case?
                There is a machine gun with less recoil and higher accuracy, ALL OTHER THINGS ARE EQUAL, which is visible to the naked eye. And what is fundamentally important when hunting drones. Anyone in this situation would agree to exchange their AK for an AEK. Despite its greater complexity and high cost. Life is more important.
                1. 0
                  18 January 2025 18: 54
                  but replacing the AK with the AEK doesn't help, even a banal underbarrel grenade with axial fragments and a weakened MBB will be thousands of times more effective than the AEK, but even this solution is easily countered by the development of drones.
                  1. 0
                    19 January 2025 10: 17
                    Replacing the AK with the AEK is certainly not an absolute solution to the problem. Any solution has its pros and cons. The disadvantage of the underbarrel grenade is that there is either one, which is risky, or you have to carry around magazines and kilograms. Especially since there is no normal one yet. The Saiga looks more advantageous in this case. But this is just me from the couch. The fighters know better.
    4. -3
      11 January 2025 20: 37
      Quote: malyvalv
      For starters, it would be good to re-equip the front line fighters from Kalashnikovs to balanced assault rifles like the AEK 971. The problem with the Kalashnikovs is their low accuracy when firing in bursts. For a slow-moving large target like a person (compared to a drone), the accuracy is normal. But for defense against drones, it needs to be much higher.
      The main thing is not to carry anything extra. And after a little training with plates, you can achieve good results with drones.

      Talking about the same thing... How to defend against UAVs that are attacking the entire European part of Russia... How to fight off FPV drones...
      It is necessary to plan and IMPLEMENT - destruction of key points on the supply route of the Ukrainian Armed Forces front - bridges, railway stations, ports - throughout Ukraine, from the border with Poland to the front itself.
      Drones do not fly to the front lines themselves - they are brought in by transport - transport moves along the roads - on the roads, even across a small stream, there is a BRIDGE - destroy all bridges - even the smallest ones.
      1. 0
        14 January 2025 01: 41
        Quote: cat Rusich
        destroy all bridges - even the smallest ones.

        And you calculate the number of bridges, the cost of their destruction, the cost of their repair and the cost of repeated destruction, the Ministry of Defense of all countries, even during WW2, did not have money for this, and therefore they bombed bridges only in waves and only to limit the maneuvers of large forces, and in local wars the benefits will be even less, especially since, if necessary, drones can fly by air to the nearest airfield of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and / or a large highway and / or any field
        1. 0
          14 January 2025 20: 37
          Quote: ProkletyiPirat
          and in local wars the benefits will be even less,
          War 08.08.08 or "Five-day war".
          Guftinsky Bridge, both the "old" and the "new" - there are two of them, across the Patsa River near the village of Gufta in the Dzhavsky district of South Ossetia - if the Georgian army had destroyed these bridges before the Russian army arrived, then there would not have been a war with Georgia "Five-day" - and would it become "five hundred days"...
          From the previous story I recall "Suvorov's Alpine campaign" and the battle for the "Devil's Bridge" - what a "small" difficulty the destruction of the Devil's Bridge caused the Russian army...
          hi
          1. 0
            15 January 2025 03: 10
            let's not confuse warm with soft, that is, let's not confuse two different types of terrain of the theater of military operations: "mountains" and "plains", there are "bottlenecks in the transfer of forces and resources", in the first theater of military operations they are, in the second they are not. To limit maneuvers in the first theater of military operations, it is necessary to destroy a dozen bridges, and in the second, thousands, in the first theater of military operations, control of bridge repairs costs little, and in the second, a lot.
            1. 0
              15 January 2025 20: 00
              Quote: ProkletyiPirat
              let's not confuse warm with soft, that is, let's not confuse two different types of terrain in a theater of military operations: "mountains" and "plains", there are "bottlenecks in the transfer of forces and resources", in the first theater of military operations they are there, in the second they are not.
              The road is a bottleneck.
              Even on the plains - all supplies go by roads (though recently supplies have appeared via "cargo" flying drones...) - all bridges are "tied" to roads - it is not possible to simply cross the river anywhere - you need to go out onto the road, and not onto the "wild shore" - meaning cargo transport.
              I will try to give a "historical example" - in November 1812 Napoleon's army approached the Berezina River - the river is not wide, the terrain flat - cross the river anywhere and move on...
              But army ran into the Berezina River - without of the bridge the army cannot be transported to the other side...
              Napoleon was only able to transport his army to the other bank having built a bridge... - the whole "highlight" was that the opposite bank was controlled RIA - but Napoleon was able to cunningly convince the commander of the Russian army that Napoleon would cross over to another place, the Russian army went to that “other place”, and only the 3 battalions - Napoleon's army overcame their resistance and went home...
              Control over the restoration of bridges and the construction of pontoon crossings is a duty intelligence - and when the bridge is restored or a pontoon crossing is built - and strike again...
              By what forces - and by those "hundreds and thousands" With Geraniums, Kalibrs - which we pound "military facilities" or the energy system of Ukraine almost daily - only the Ukrainian Armed Forces still find equipment for a counter-offensive and there is electricity in Ukraine, albeit intermittently...

              Quote: ProkletyiPirat
              let's not confuse warm with soft.
              A quilted jacket, a fur coat, a down jacket... - both warm and soft, although they themselves do not create "warmth", but they say that "warm fur coat".
              hi
      2. 0
        14 January 2025 08: 41
        again this nonsense about bridges, no such thing, you press a button and there are no bridges, there aren't enough missiles for bridges
  2. +7
    11 January 2025 06: 57
    If, according to Mr. Mitrofanov, submachine guns with obviously weaker characteristics than Kalashnikovs can be used against drones, then why can't drones be fired at with standard weapons? In general, another "Mitrofanovshchina".
    1. +1
      11 January 2025 21: 08
      Drone protection is needed here and now! And even better, yesterday and more! So you need to quickly use what is available and can be used with the least amount of time and money. During World War II, the Germans used flare guns, creating several types of ammunition for them, including even anti-tank. Why not use the same flare guns today, making liner inserts for shotgun cartridges of different calibers! Make the same inserts for underbarrel grenade launchers. And in multi-charge grenade launchers, equip some of the chambers with inserts, and leave some with grenades. You can return the weapon to its original state by simply pulling out the liner! And all the fuss with deciding whether to use a pistol or a shotgun and who will legalize them and when this will all be decided - only leads to no result and increased losses! The EU announced the delivery of 30 drones to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and the greenhorns are buying up fiber optic spools from China in bulk so that their drones become insensitive to Russian electronic warfare!
  3. +1
    11 January 2025 07: 05
    Rapid-fire small-bore, not a bad idea against drones. Could have a sequel.
    1. +2
      11 January 2025 07: 36
      Quote: aviapit123
      Rapid-fire small-bore, not a bad idea against drones. Could have a sequel.

      In light of the fact that the troops cannot be satiated with shotguns, not even new ones, but confiscated ones, and the shame with individual weapons for pilots, the article looks like a mockery. Of course, the author did not want it to turn out this way, but what is, is.
  4. +2
    11 January 2025 07: 39
    The plate, having flown out of the thrower, moves along a more or less predictable trajectory. And the drone, whether controlled by an operator or by AI, can arbitrarily change the trajectory. While there are few shotguns on the LBS, and there are no small-caliber rapid-fire ones at all, in the word "at all", no one bothers with the issues of drone safety from these countermeasures. If the front line is saturated with such means, then very soon drones will begin to fly in a zigzag anti-shot pattern. Given the speed of development of AI and all kinds of sensors, drones will be able to notice the danger themselves and get away from it.
    1. +1
      11 January 2025 21: 27
      Quote: Nagan
      then very soon drones will start flying in a shotgun zigzag pattern.
      And this will be a big plus. And the control becomes more complicated, and the speed of movement to the target decreases. Everything is like in the navy with an anti-submarine zigzag.
  5. +4
    11 January 2025 08: 37
    As they said in one movie-

    Now here's a suggestion: what if...
    - Not worth it.
    “I see ... Then maybe you need to ...”
    - Not necessary.
    - Clear. Allow at least ...
    - Well, try this...


    The 5,45x18 cartridge is good because the recoil is weak and allows the weapon to stay on the aiming line. I shot it from a PSM, it barely throws up
  6. +2
    11 January 2025 09: 10
    I saw a video on YouTube with a double-barreled break-action pistol - a vertical 12-gauge. It is quite possible to take down an attacking copter at 15-20 m with this. It is certainly better than a helmet or a bag of canned food.
    1. +5
      11 January 2025 10: 22
      Can you imagine the recoil of a 12 gauge? If you shoot with a pistol like that, it's not far from a hand injury. So in the video, they were most likely shooting with a sporting gun, with a small charge of both powder and shot. And then the effect will be noticeably less.
      1. +1
        11 January 2025 17: 40
        Quote: paul3390
        If you shoot with a pistol like this, it's not far from a hand injury.

        How do you shoot with a sawed-off rifle? And double-barreled shotguns are also sawed off. In the video, there is something similar, like a pistol with a horizontal handle and support for the barrels with the other hand during shooting. Shooting practically point-blank at 15-20 meters, and not 50-70 meters, like with shotguns.
        1. +2
          11 January 2025 19: 53
          There are ready-made developments in the form of revolvers OTs-62 and RSh-12. There is also a cartridge with linked shot mentioned in the article.
          Quite suitable additional weapons for machine gunners, snipers and mortarmen, as well as for combat vehicle crews.
          This must be immediately sent to the front and the experience of its use analyzed.
          1. 0
            12 January 2025 10: 41
            Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
            This must be immediately sent to the front and the experience of its use analyzed.

            Too complex for mass production in the "needed urgently here and now" mode + more expensive and heavier.
            1. 0
              12 January 2025 10: 45
              The revolver was invented in the first half of the 19th century and was put into production at the same time. And suddenly it became too complicated?
              1. 0
                12 January 2025 10: 50
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                And suddenly it became too complicated?

                Too complicated when setting up production, not reproducing the design. And especially in our time, when there is a catastrophic shortage of specialists in production. We need to make a lot, simpler and cheaper. And a revolver is still a fairly precise mechanism.
  7. +3
    11 January 2025 09: 46
    The high price of 5,7x28mm cartridges was due to a patent owned by the Belgian company FN, which limited the production and sale of these cartridges. The patent for this cartridge, created in 1986, expired in 2021.

    By this time, according to the natives, the American police and intelligence agencies had become disillusioned with this caliber, and all purchased weapons smoothly moved to the darkest corners of the armories or were sold. And now, despite the appearance of cheap weapons, including Turkish ones, there is no particular demand for them.

    As for the idea of ​​"a drowning man will save himself", it is similar to the idea of ​​giving every soldier an anti-aircraft gun to protect against aircraft and an anti-tank grenade to protect against tanks.
  8. +1
    11 January 2025 09: 48
    I think the author has attached "anti-drone eggs" to the article about small-bore rifles. Because the topic is in demand.
    You can also attach it to the article about home-made preparations (a jar of cucumbers).
  9. 0
    11 January 2025 10: 03
    So it will soon be the PPSh's turn...
    1. +1
      11 January 2025 12: 20
      Quote: pavel.tipin
      So it will soon be the PPSh's turn.

      What? I like the PPSh! The rate of fire is good (900-1000v/m), the shops are awesome fellow (Whether you want a disk (drum) for 71 cartridges; whether you want a 35-round magazine... Put a collimator on it and use it! (By the way, they do use it!)
      1. 0
        11 January 2025 12: 23
        In principle, it can be kept in the corner of every truck bed.
        1. 0
          11 January 2025 12: 33
          Quote: pavel.tipin
          In principle, it can be kept in the corner of every truck bed.

          Considering that assault on motorcycles and ATVs is in trend now, then you can also use it to shoot! Considering close combat, the PPSh can be made into an assault weapon (to arm part of the group...)
          1. 0
            11 January 2025 19: 35
            Have you ever held a PPSh in your hands? At least at post #1 near the eternal flame?
            An extremely heavy and uncomfortable thing.
            1. +1
              11 January 2025 20: 01
              Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
              An extremely heavy and uncomfortable thing.

              Do you want "checkers" or "go"?
              1. +1
                11 January 2025 20: 12
                Have you ever seen a video where they shoot almost in bursts from a 12-gauge Vepr? You are advocating for practically unusable samples when there are already tested and effective ones.
    2. +1
      11 January 2025 12: 29
      So it will soon be the PPSh's turn...

      The PPSh made a great contribution to the Victory-45, its use in trench and urban battles gave the Germans no chance. The stock with a semi-pistol grip and a perforated casing provided a comfortable grip and shooting from any position.
      1. +2
        11 January 2025 12: 34
        The main thing is that the number of PPSh in warehouses and with friends in Africa and Southeast Asia must be very large.
    3. +1
      11 January 2025 20: 05
      Tracer cartridges would allow shooting accurately not only from the shoulder, but also from the belt.
  10. +1
    11 January 2025 10: 11
    I'm too lazy to read the whole story, but it seems like the author suggests shooting down drones with pestles? wassat Creatively.

    You can also throw grenades at them - with an air burst. Wear shields-mirrors - to prevent the lens from being blinded by the reflected light of the sun. Use riding moose for transportation and cargo transportation - they are good at kicking with their hooves, and if you climb on it (the moose) with the aforementioned shield and pestle - it's just beautiful. Insane.
    1. +1
      11 January 2025 12: 38
      I agree :) The level of the ideas you described, obviously in the order of trolling, quite corresponds to the level of thoughtfulness of the author's idea about shooting at drones from PP or even automatic pistols. If we consider personal weapons against drones, then the only thing better than a 5-shot semiautomatic 12-gauge can be a semiautomatic with Techcrim cartridges with coordinated buckshot. And the only thing better than this can be an AUTOMATIC 12-gauge carbine with the same cartridges. In the USA, these are sold with round drum magazines for 20-30 cartridges. A hurricane thing, of course...
  11. +2
    11 January 2025 10: 32
    It is correctly noted that pistols and in general the diversity of models are not developed due to the lack of a civilian arms market. It would give a huge boost to the development of the gunsmith industry, like in the States. A classmate lived in the States for a long time, he told me what collections people have there, the variety of revolvers alone is breathtaking, and everything else even more so. And our government is afraid to give guns to its people
    1. -1
      11 January 2025 13: 26
      Where is it with you, I wonder? wink In Russia, it is easier to buy a shotgun than to get a driver's license. There are no people willing to do so, not even a single one.
      Actually, you can buy whatever you want - with the exception of revolvers and pestles, the legislation is quite liberal by European standards. My bullets:
      1. 0
        11 January 2025 16: 00
        You can buy them, I once had my own guns, but they are like toys, to shoot at poor animals in a designated place, at cans. But you can't use them for their intended purpose, in your personal defense they play into the hands of the attackers! You can't come up with more insane laws on self-defense. And the ruling authorities are afraid to revise the laws, otherwise they will start a methodical shooting of migrants and other scum! They don't want to clean our cities from garbage. That's why there is no point in buying all these toys, they are a pain in the ass.
        1. 0
          11 January 2025 17: 21
          And what about you - did you buy guns like people to mow down from the hip with impunity? bully I will disappoint you to the point of impossibility - this is difficult to do even in Somalia and other places with maximum tolerance and inclusiveness towards firearms: customs, morals, blood feuds and all that kind of regulate worse than written laws. They will put you in a cage like a giraffe, or hang you from a crane, like in Iran - a pun. fellow Pulyalovo is about sports and hunting, everything else is just an adjective - when you suddenly have to.

          Although all those who moan about self-defense and other excesses during the discussion of bullet guns - usually had nothing more weighty than a fork, well, that's an observation. If you dump a KAMAZ truck of firearms in their sandbox in front of their house, they still won't take anything, like, the caliber is wrong, the barrel is the wrong size, the front sight is too big. Those 3.7 million who already own a bullet gun in Russia will pick them up, the rest will come up with rotten excuses.
          1. -3
            11 January 2025 17: 40
            And this is all because we don't have a culture of owning weapons! A bunch of hunters is a drop in the ocean, that's why they are afraid to allow everyone, because they will start grabbing a gun at every drinking bout. But here is a vicious circle, there will be no culture of handling until you give it to everyone, and you won't give it to everyone because there is no culture of handling. The USA has been cultivating this culture throughout their history and how many people die every year in everyday life. Yes, there are many places where almost everyone is allowed to have a gun and nothing happens, the same countries live there, Israel, Austria, Türkiye, I think
            1. +1
              11 January 2025 17: 43
              You may not have this, but in my circle of friends only cultured people hang out.
  12. +4
    11 January 2025 10: 40
    Anyone who has ever gone hunting, or at least gone to a round stand, understands that only a very advanced shooter can hit a plate (read: a drone) with a bullet...
    1. -1
      11 January 2025 11: 52
      Quote: Alexander X
      Anyone who has ever gone hunting, or at least gone to a round stand, understands that only a very advanced shooter can hit a plate (read: a drone) with a bullet...

      Any shooter can hit the target! But only by ACCIDENT! And aiming is the realm of non-scientific fiction.
      1. -1
        11 January 2025 19: 43
        But what about when they pass the UKS officer rank and hit the target from 350-450 meters?
        a moving group of infantry with a long burst? After all, most of them hit. The angle is about the same as when shooting at a drone at a distance of 50-100 m.
    2. +1
      11 January 2025 12: 23
      Give us the "Metal Storm" canister gun!
  13. +1
    11 January 2025 12: 01
    1. The size and weight of the object you are going to shoot at.
    2. The mass of explosives and the destructive power of this object.
    In principle, these two points are enough to put an end to the article. I hope there is no need to "chew" what and why?
    3. "Small calibers" are out of the question right away. Why?... there are plenty of studies on the destruction of incoming objects.
    4 ... 5 ... 6 ...
    And "An example of a fragmenting striking element for a 9x21 mm cartridge with 4 and 8 quadrant striking elements..." - this definitely won't work, the shell will open only upon contact with the target.
  14. 0
    11 January 2025 12: 02
    Engineer's thought: Has anyone tried to install a laser pointer on a machine gun and see:
    1) what will happen to the drone camera?
    2) How hard is it to aim at?
    3) if we increase the radiation power (within possible/reasonable limits)?
    4) and defocus the beam a little to make aiming easier?
    5) use a scanning device
    The experiment is a mere seven kopecks (compared to the development of new types of weapons). The effect....maybe...
    1. ANB
      0
      11 January 2025 23: 56
      . 4) and defocus the beam a little to make aiming easier?

      I saw in the 80s in TM a scheme with a laser amplifier, which snatches the reflected beam, amplifies it and returns it back exactly as it came. Some kind of tricky chamber with gas. And you can drive it back and forth many times. The article said that the scheme was tested in the laboratory and works.
      In fact, it is a self-guided laser. You aim a wide initial beam at the target, and then the reflection is amplified.
  15. 0
    11 January 2025 12: 05
    An expensive PDW round is not necessary for shooting at drones. Drones are usually unarmored. For this purpose, regular cheap .22 LR rounds for a small-bore rifle are more suitable in combination with a high-rate-of-fire weapon. For example, an American-180, possibly with a shortened barrel.
    1. 0
      11 January 2025 12: 48
      Quote from solar
      American-180, possibly with a shortened barrel.

      I have been suggesting this for a long time! But the "people" don't seem to accept this suggestion! By the way, there is a "signal" PU-26 for sale (it seems not to be a weapon and is for 26 mm flare gun cartridges)...
      1. 0
        11 January 2025 20: 22
        I'll try to explain, it's not difficult. Shooting long bursts at moving targets is done with aiming by tracers. In small calibers, tracers are a problem. Another problem is the effective range of small-bore shot. It is the same as for large shot.
        All other things being equal, all this is inferior to a shotgun in terms of efficiency by several times.
        Have you ever held a PPSh in your hands or fired long bursts from an AK?
        1. -1
          11 January 2025 21: 55
          Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
          Have you ever held a PPSh in your hands or fired long bursts from an AK?

          I held a PPSh in my hands, but a very, very long time ago... I fired single and short bursts from an AK (2-3 rounds)... At one time, I used the "American-180" to practice firing long bursts from a small-caliber weapon... So... don't be scared, people, everything has been tried before us!
          1. +2
            11 January 2025 22: 10
            Then you'll have to repeat the argumentation. If it doesn't work the first time.
            Can you imagine the trajectory of a bullet from an AK and a small-bore gun? The AK has good flatness, but the small-bore gun cannot boast of this and its initial bullet velocity is terrible.
            When firing a long burst from a popgun, which you have been promoting for three years now, if not more, you simply won't be able to track the trajectory of the bullets without tracers. Your entire burst will fly off into thin air. There won't be enough muzzle velocity or flatness.
            So clearer?
            A shotgun does not require precise aiming, and as proof of this, effective clay pigeon shooting. And increasing the caliber from a sporting 20 to a hunting 12 will give an even better result.
            And the PPSh weighs the same as the Vepr, but it can’t work effectively against drones at all.
  16. +2
    11 January 2025 12: 26
    In general, Mitrofanov's article is another attempt to show off about a serious problem, relying only on the opinion of BD participants, without going into a serious assessment of what is happening. All the fighters' requests for shotguns to fight drones are "cries for help" from the category "give me at least something". The author is not at all interested in the fact that a drone must first be detected before it can be destroyed. And for this, modern day/night sighting systems are needed. This is the path that all the armies of leading countries are taking, unfortunately, except for ours.
  17. +2
    11 January 2025 12: 42
    IMHO there should be some automatic solution (conceptually like the shoulder gun of the "Predator" from the films of the same name, but of course not on the shoulder, I mean the very principle of a compact and autonomous shooting module with AI), because, although I agree with the author's opinion about the positive effect of equipping the infantry with pistols or submachine guns, on a mass scale it would cost a pretty penny + training on a mass scale would also cost a pretty penny. Also, a specific soldier is now significantly overloaded with armor, gadgets and weapons, the question of the really EFFECTIVE use of such means IN THE MASSES, taking this into account, is an open question.
    At the same time, an AI module armed with automatic weapons and working on sound signatures - lidar would be much more effective in performing such a task than a specific person. Modern servo drives provide significant accuracy and positioning speed, inaccessible to a person. The platform for such a module itself could be very different - from a stationary version "on a tripod", which can be brought by a transport copter to the desired area, to installation on "dogs", buggies and light equipment.
    In fact, the module itself would not be something out of the ordinary technically - 2-3 control servos in planes, a slightly modified weapon-analogue of those mentioned by the author (domestic development), a slightly modified feed mechanism (moving the magazine to the side or up, variations of a larger magazine), possibly a module for a twin weapon. An optical sensor (or lidar), acoustic sensors, AI-stuffing with drone profiles, the ability to form a sector control task for the module (when the module controls not 360 degrees but, for example, 120 in a certain sector).

    AI ALWAYS copes with precision tasks and tasks requiring significant attention over a long lag much better than humans, so there is no need to come up with some kind of half-solutions here.
    1. +1
      11 January 2025 12: 55
      Small arms with AI sights are being developed and there are already prototypes...
      1. +1
        11 January 2025 13: 04
        The US Army is already putting the XM157 smart sights into service.
        Under the NGSW-FC program, Vortex Optics will supply up to 250 XM000 sights over ten years. The deal is potentially valued at $157 billion. The sight features variable-zoom optics, an integrated rangefinder, a ballistic calculator, atmospheric sensors, laser target illumination, and other subsystems.
        1. 0
          11 January 2025 13: 10
          Quote from solar
          The US Army is already putting the XM157 smart sights into service.

          "Marker" X indicates that this thing is still listed as a prototype....
          1. 0
            11 January 2025 13: 37
            On January 8, 2021, it became known that the US Army signed a contract for up to $2,7 billion in fire control systems that will support its program to arm squads of soldiers with next-generation technologies.

            The 10-year agreement with Sheltered Wings (part of the group) provides for the supply of up to 250 XM157 Squad Weapons Next Generation sighting systems. They will be integrated into both the NGSW rifle and the NGSW automatic rifle. The fire control system incorporates a number of advanced technologies to enhance the combat effectiveness of soldiers. The suite of technologies used in the new product includes a variable magnification optical system, a backup etched reticle, a laser rangefinder, a ballistic calculator, an atmospheric sensor suite, a compass, wireless communications for soldiers, lasers for targeting in the visible and infrared range and a digital display overlay. The new system will replace close combat optics and rifle combat optics for infantry soldiers, scouts and engineers.

            Judging by the existence of a contract for the supply of a large batch, we are no longer talking about prototypes.
            1. 0
              13 January 2025 20: 02
              Yes, similar smart sights from other manufacturers have been present on the civilian weapons market for 5 years now, both in digital and thermal imaging versions. The American corporation ATN also has them, and China is not far behind.
      2. +2
        11 January 2025 13: 13
        I'm not even talking about sights here. A person will be inferior to a machine in reaction, speed and accuracy. Training a skill for a person is a long process, the person himself is strongly influenced by the surrounding conditions, more so than a machine. He can lose concentration - but not a machine.
        What is needed here is a system like a mini-Phalanx to cover the infantry from drones. Because the next generation of drones as a response to electronic warfare will be autonomous drone hunters that do not need an operator, this is an inevitable stage. With the advent of such, a compact modular system that automatically works on them will definitely be needed.
        1. +1
          11 January 2025 13: 50
          I understand you [I noticed that you are talking about systems (complexes)!] But...! 1. In the absence of a coat of arms, we write in simple...". 2. Many problems are solved from different "angles"! That is, the only solution is not used! Small arms with an AI sight without "self-propelled" drives can become the only "manual" (infantry) weapon with a fairly high efficiency! While weapons (multi-barrel, rapid-fire with a large supply of cartridges, with electric drives ...) on a self-propelled chassis can sometimes do without "cool" AI! (Although now there are installations like ZU-23-2 or YakB-4 with a laser rangefinder, ballistic computer and thermal imager!)
          1. 0
            12 January 2025 03: 07
            I understand you, well, an interesting idea in general, and I hope that it is closer to the front than the autonomous module and I also hope that this will really be a useful solution.
            However, I personally have some skepticism about "recommendation" systems in this situation. It is difficult for me to imagine how in the heat of battle with all the variety of positions, with body armor and various attachments, the buttstock and anything else can somehow REALLY correct the position of the weapon in the shooter's hands under significant time constraints. I admit that this solution is for situations "the detector beeps - there is a bird nearby - we see - aim - we shoot", then yes, perhaps, not bad. Although I cannot get rid of skepticism about the possibility of somehow adequately adjusting the shooter's aiming through the buttstock, in addition to the fact that the "meat pie" in principle will be an unnecessary and slow link in the chain of decision-making of the machine, moreover, prone not only to slow down, but also to be dull.
            Compared to AI, humans think slooooowly and their muscles react even worse and are not as precise. At a distance of 50 meters+, a potentially lethal device may not be visible to a human, it will cover this distance very quickly and taking all this into account, I, of course, admit that this is a solution, but it seems to me somewhat palliative. But, better than nothing - 0.
            In general, "AI" sounds too loud. The tasks of tracking, anticipation, etc. and issuing commands to control units at the software level were solved back in the 60-70s of the last century. Now 1 stone at 350 nm, which we (it seems ALREADY) produce (on our own equipment) or in BLR produce (again, on our own) will be more than enough to provide such tasks (not God knows what kind).
            I agree about the servo drives - although they are not a super expensive thing either. Considering how much manpower the enemy lost from the FPV and what kind of compensation we have for deaths (for example), perhaps a mechanized solution to the problem will not seem so expensive.
            But time will tell. In any case, based on the results (and even before completion) of the SVO, many new pages for military science and practice will be added.
        2. +1
          11 January 2025 13: 52
          The release of such systems is a matter of the near future, and in different versions. Portable, for example.
          US tests ZeroMark automated targeting system for anti-drone rifles
          The Zeromark Motorized Shoulder Rest makes it easy for even inexperienced shooters to shoot down drones with the M27 assault rifle, a variant of the H&K HK416. Testing took place on October 23.... The Zeromark solution is a kit for upgrading existing assault rifles, which are standard issue for soldiers. The kit consists of three components: a shoulder rest, a sensor module, and a handguard.

          The shoulder pad is the most unusual part of the kit. It has a built-in electric motor that moves the pad along the X and Y axes. The front handle is also motorized and functions as a gimbal.

          The sensor module was mounted on the right Picatinny rail of the handguard. The photo clearly shows that the module is significantly larger than standard sighting aids, such as the AN/PEQ-16A laser light module that was mounted on the Marine Corps M27 on top of the handguard.
          The sensor module detects the drone optically and electronically. This is done using image recognition. Electronics calculate the distance to the target and its speed. Ballistic data stored in the system also includes the trajectory and speed of the projectile. All the soldier has to do is aim at the flying drone and pull the trigger. The rifle essentially aims at the drone itself, turning rough aiming into a precise hit. Zeromark gives an example: a small drone flying at 160 km/h can be hit in 98 percent of cases with the first shot at a distance of 180 meters. Even less experienced shooters will be able to do this.
          According to Zeromark, at this distance you only need to aim at a circle about 10 meters in diameter - the rifle will do the rest.

          Or installed on a vehicle
          What is the Bullfrog turret:

          – The ACS company did not invent anything new, but simply assembled a turret from ready-made parts and a large-caliber machine gun. An M240 with an electro-optical station and servos was installed on a special tripod.

          – The developers claim that the turret operates on the basis of AI. That is, the search for targets, guidance and destruction of UAVs is carried out by a neural network. The operator can observe the work or give orders.

          Indeed, the test footage shows how the turret automatically detects drones, after which it destroys all targets with precise shots. It is noteworthy that the firing range was impressive - about 1000 meters. The developers themselves believe that the turret will successfully hit targets at a distance of up to 1800 meters. The design is lightweight (up to 180 kg), so it can be installed anywhere: a car body, stationary platforms or even heavy armored vehicles.
          1. 0
            12 January 2025 03: 26
            I have seen that such products have a place to be, however such (rifle) solutions seem to me to be excessively heavy for the task, and in general they look like that. Although the niche, yes, certainly exists. It seems to me that the situation when the system detects a drone with optics at 1.8 km is somewhat excessive, rather such modules can be useful in the rear or for the protection of individual objects. Directly at the front - IMHO, excessive range and, probably, power. And dimensions, due to power and a smaller BC, and weight.
            Here is a system capable of covering a radius of 200-400 meters due to a high rate of fire with a small caliber - this is already more interesting, as it seems to me. This already looks more realistic taking into account the all-round visibility from some forest belt or stronghold.
            Here, it seems to me, a good design is not a 180 kg one, but something (preferably quickly disassemblable) up to 30 kg. Ideally, a module up to 20 kg (without a power supply) providing various installation solutions, up to the possibility of attaching it to 4-6 thick sticks dug into the ground.
            In this case, we will get a really popular product and not some Uzbek specialist. But, how realistic it is to make it in such weight and dimensions - here the specialists know better.
    2. 0
      12 January 2025 00: 39
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      Optical sensor (or lidar),

      It's like that, but Lidar is energy-intensive and easy to detect, so passive detection systems are the way to go.
  18. +3
    11 January 2025 13: 34
    What's the problem with supplying our military with 12-caliber Saiga and high-capacity magazines? Production is established. The design is proven and inexpensive to produce. It's possible to churn out 12-caliber buckshot cartridges. Especially since, as I read, the Klimovsky Cartridge Plant was nationalized (?).
    At least as an initial measure, until they come up with something more effective.
    1. +1
      11 January 2025 20: 43
      Moreover, three years ago this could be considered as an initial measure. However, it is still relevant today. Drones on optical fiber have appeared, and they are slower than regular FPV.
      A solution that could be considered temporary is increasingly looking like a permanent one.
      You can't take the large Saiga and Vepr with you everywhere; in some places the RSh-12 revolver would be more suitable.
  19. 0
    11 January 2025 13: 47
    In my opinion, the best self-defense weapon for the "second line" is the AKSU. It is compact and light enough to carry with you at all times. If necessary, it allows you to engage in a full-fledged fight, which you cannot do with a pistol. Only with them you can fight off bandits in the rear. There are also countless rounds for the AKSU in the front zone.
    But it is difficult for even a trained fighter to hit a drone with a machine gun. A pistol has a much shorter range. The fighter has little time to fight back. There are few bullets.
    In my opinion, a small-sized shotgun is much more rational. It can be made in the format of a pistol and a submachine gun. If it is difficult to make an automatic fire mode in a submachine gun, a single one will do, up to a pump version. The caliber should also be larger than 9 mm. The larger the caliber of the shotgun - the more pellets in the cartridge - the higher the probability of hitting the midges. One shot may be enough. As a self-defense weapon, the shotgun also has advantages.
    It makes sense to make every second shotgun cartridge anti-drone - with pellets fastened with a net. Such a cartridge is also suitable for self-defense, but its range and destructive power against a human enemy will be less. A special flip mechanism can be provided that allows switching cartridges from one type to another. You can even provide a third type of cartridge in reserve - signal and incendiary. For such a cartridge, you can provide another barrel with a quick reload (similar to an under-barrel grenade launcher)
  20. -1
    11 January 2025 13: 57
    Let's say you are attacked by wasps or bees (drones). What is more effective, to destroy them one by one or to destroy the wasp nest?
    It would probably be more effective to destroy the wasp's nest.
    In the case of drones - a factory for their production, transport that delivers them to the LBS.
  21. +1
    11 January 2025 14: 37
    striking elements connected by a Kevlar thread

    I imagined the Ministry of Defense purchasing and equipping infantry units with ammunition with Kevlar thread, and my heart immediately felt warm.
    1. 0
      11 January 2025 20: 28
      As much as it may be more necessary for artillerymen, it is also important for them to defend themselves against drones.
  22. 0
    11 January 2025 15: 16
    The problem of combating drones is similar to the problem of combating hypersonic gliding units - both have lateral acceleration, i.e. unpredictability of the trajectory, and, therefore, the impossibility of destruction by a single ballistic (or poorly maneuverable in this time scale) munition. Either a nearby explosion or a group strike (like shot in the case of a drone) is needed. It is clear that it is necessary to protect an individual soldier from drones, a group means of destruction (an air defense turret, for example) may not always be nearby, but hanging an additional weapon on a soldier just for such protection is too much.
    The solution may be some kind of autonomous device the size of a hand grenade, designed for this purpose. By analogy - to fight an enemy in cover, a soldier has a grenade, to fight tanks - a rocket-propelled grenade.
  23. +1
    11 January 2025 17: 30
    The author did not touch upon the main problem of remote control weapons, in a confrontation between a person and a drone, a person always loses, because he risks his life. And for the drone operator, the result of the fight is only an episode in improving his skills. fellow
  24. 0
    11 January 2025 21: 32
    All this can be done on the basis of the PPSh. But all this is useless. Because it is better to make a smoothbore machine gun. Not a submachine gun, but a machine gun. To shoot hunting cartridges.
  25. 0
    12 January 2025 02: 34
    The author is considering the idea of ​​fighting in FPV using a pistol. I would like to know what are the author's results shooting a pistol at a standard target?
    A simple stationary target. Not an FPV, which has a speed of 70 km.
  26. +2
    12 January 2025 06: 35
    When a guy writes that the US "secret service" (which protects the country's top officials and their families) buys cheap, decommissioned cartridges for training, then you don't need to read any further.
    It is obvious that during these long holidays the squirrel finally came out of the hollow...
  27. 0
    12 January 2025 07: 17
    "... this is largely a consequence of the absence of a civilian market for short-barreled rifled weapons..."

    What was the Colt called? The Equalizer?
    If we, civilians, suddenly had the right to openly carry and use pistols for defense, we would get used to politeness in five years, maybe more.
    Все.
  28. 0
    12 January 2025 13: 09
    if by drones and from hands - then a small-caliber smoothbore like 410 caliber
  29. DO
    0
    12 January 2025 17: 25
    It seems relevant to study the possibilities of creating a 9 mm caliber cartridge with a separating bullet, the fragments of which are connected to each other with kelvrum threads, for existing pistols.
    Since these pistols have rifled barrels, the mesh will likely start to open up immediately after it leaves the barrel due to the rotation of the weights. And that's probably why it won't fly far enough.
    The more powerful the cartridge charge, the further the weights with the net will fly. Therefore, it is probably advisable to start the research immediately with a cartridge with increased power.
  30. 0
    18 January 2025 14: 36
    In my opinion, this idea will not work at all. Not even considering that it is needed now, and not in some future. There are no big advantages over a regular machine gun, but you need to carry another weapon with ammunition.
  31. 0
    18 January 2025 19: 14
    It seems like there is nothing better than the Saiga-12 in the 30th version!
  32. 0
    19 January 2025 18: 09
    Comrades! It's trash to discuss shooting down drones with a bullet. This guy has never fired a gun. Hitting a target with a bullet is an accident. But such targets can be effectively shot down with pellets! There are a lot of confiscated weapons. As of 24, there were 180 usable barrels. The State Duma even passed a law this summer on the possibility of transferring them to the SVO, but apparently the matter hasn't gone beyond the law.