Russian Harpy-A1 anti-electronic warfare (EW) missiles attacked Odessa on Friday night.

Ukrainian funds EW, working in the Odessa region last night, turned out to be useless, Russian Drones managed to hit their designated targets without much difficulty. According to Ukrainian sources, this happened because Russian troops used a new version of the strike drone "Harpiya-A1" with an improved version of protection against electronic warfare.

Ukrainian specialists, who examined the wreckage of the Russian kamikaze drones that attacked Odessa, concluded that the targets were not regular Geranium drones, but rather a modernized version called the Harpia, with improved electronic warfare protection.

The new version received the "KK" series—this marking was applied to the drones that attacked Odessa.

The Harpy A1 kamikaze drone is nothing new to the Russian military; serial production of these UAVs began in 2023 at the Kupol Electromechanical Plant in Izhevsk. The upgraded version of the drone is equipped with a 16-channel Kometa-M16 CRPA antenna, which is used for satellite navigation in electronic warfare environments. The previous Harpy series was equipped with a 12-channel Kometa-M12 CRPA antenna.

The Harpia A1 UAV is similar in appearance to the Geranium, but has several differences. The drone carries a 150 kg warhead and is capable of striking targets at a range of up to 1,5 kilometers.

Comments

[rosomaha]

KK - the end of the koklama...? How will all these modifications be described in weapons manuals if a UAV undergoes a complete overhaul within six months?

[Uncle lee]

The drone carries a 150 kg warhead and is capable of striking at a range of up to 1,5 kilometers.

A necessary thing in the household!

[tinkers]

Several dozen just for the Odessa port! And don't forget the rest!

[Sky strike fighter]

The Harpia-A1 uses optics to home in on targets. Overall, its performance characteristics are superior to those of the Geranium. It has a larger warhead (150 kg versus 50 kg and 90 kg, depending on the Geranium modification), and a larger kill radius (1500 km versus 1000 km).

How does Harpia-A1 work?
Launch – from mobile launchers based on a KamAZ truck with an armored cabin.
The route is set in advance, using GLONASS navigation and inertial sensors.
Guidance – at the final stage, the optical system is activated, increasing accuracy.
Strike – the warhead detonates above or inside the target.

https://dzen.ru/a/aJM0C_v-yW6yFJqm

Comparison table of performance characteristics of Harpia-A1 and Geranium-2.

[bayard]

A 150 kg warhead is a very good warhead, especially with such a (optical in the terminal phase) guidance system. Truly, war is the engine of progress.

[Sky strike fighter]

Medium-range air-to-air missiles weigh approximately 150-180 kg. Just as the Geran-2 was used to create a UAV that could hunt aircraft and helicopters, a similar UAV could be created using the Garpiya-A1, but with only one medium-range air-to-air missile, provided a method for returning such a drone to base and descending via parachute is developed, and it can be guided to its target using external target designation.

[Sky strike fighter]

In continuation of the post.
The R-77 was a supersonic missile, measuring 3,6 meters in length and weighing 175 kg. It had a range of up to 100 km, a speed of Mach 4–4,5, and a target altitude of 20 meters to 25 kilometers.

The RVV-SD (R-77-1) is a modification with a range of 110 km. The missile is equipped with a rod-type multi-charge warhead, with a launch weight of no more than 190 kg. The total warhead weight is 22,5 kg.

[bayard]

It's impossible - there's nothing to guide it with. You need a radar, and a fairly powerful one.
The most you can equip the Geranium with is the old R-60 with an infrared seeker—target acquisition via the optical channel, automatic lock-on with nitrogen supply to the seeker, and helicopter engagement. With aircraft, things are much more complicated.

[Sky strike fighter]

A Link-16 analogue simply needs to be installed on the Harpia-A1. It will then guide the aircraft to its target, receiving information from the S-70, Su-35S, Su-57, and S-400 radars. The Su-35S, according to rumors, successfully guided S-400 missiles to their targets, meaning it can also guide UAVs, which will launch medium-range air-to-air missiles based on the received coordinates. This would be especially effective if there were a swarm of such reusable hunter-drones, with each one or two drones assigned a specific target for attack based on external target designation. A systematic approach is needed.

Link 16 is of particular interest to the Russian defense industry for a number of reasons. By dissecting the communications module, we can attempt to understand how the encryption and signal transmission system works, thereby creating our own analogue. Furthermore, cryptographers can identify the device's weaknesses and devise effective ways to neutralize NATO reconnaissance UAVs.

https://overclockers.ru/blog/ProKino/show/92005/posle-poteri-bpla-mq-9-reaper-rossijskie-uchenye-mogut-poluchit-dostup-k-shifram-i-ustrojstvu-link-16

[bayard]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

You just need to install a Link-16 analogue on the Harpy-A1. And through it, you can receive information from the S-70 radar,

If the S-70 with its radar activated enters the fray, then let's forget about the circus with the Harpy missiles on its pods. Let the Harpy missiles hit their designated targets, while the Okhotnik can calmly hit targets within its radar range with its R-37M or R-97 missiles. It has a decent ammunition load for that.
There's no need to come up with some spur-of-the-moment solution; everything's already been done. The tools and methods available allow us, if necessary, to clear the skies of aircraft and the ground of air defense assets over a fairly wide front and up to 300 km deep. If we're talking about an offensive, though, "we haven't even started yet." , and for now this is exactly the case.
But we have taken out and continue to take out all the energy.
Maybe we'll get around to building bridges and the will will be there.

[Sky strike fighter]

The thing is, the whole charm of exchanging an inexpensive Harpia-A1 for a conventional fighter in an air battle is that it would not be a pity to lose such a Harpia-A1 in the hunter-drone modification, to exchange it for a fighter, unlike the more expensive S-70. In addition, there can be many such Harpia-A1s due to their relative cheapness and reusability; they can work in a swarm, exchanging information about enemy fighters and attacking them with medium-range air-to-air missiles. The whole charm of such a swarm is its large number, cheapness, and the absence of expensive radars on board, like on the same S-70, Su-35S. These drones work due to the Link-16 analogue and network-centric data exchange, without exposing the same S-70, Su-35S, Su-57M1, S-400, and only receiving data from them in real time to attack enemy fighters with their medium-range air-to-air missiles. Your approach is that you do not want to exchange cheap drones for enemy fighters in an air battle. You are for a fight on equal terms, fighter to fighter, and, as a consequence, for equal losses of the parties to the conflict. But in my opinion, it is better to lose a much cheaper drone, which can be relatively painlessly replaced due to its low cost and, as a consequence, mass production, than to lose an expensive S-70 drone or an even more expensive Su-35S, Su-57 fighter in a battle. And so, hunter-drones based on the technological basis of the Garpiya-A1 and based on the experience of using the Geran-2 hunter-drones with MANPADS on board can become an addition, a long arm of the same S-70, Su-35S, Su-57, which, being in a relative delay from the air battle, can control the same Harpiya-A1 drones and through They are essentially intended to engage in aerial combat with enemy fighters. The drones, however, would be launched by the same missiles based on external target designation, and they would become targets for enemy fighters, rather than more expensive aircraft like the Su-35S and Su-57. The advantage of this design is that it trades a drone for a fighter, rather than a fighter for a fighter. Furthermore, the fighters, operating in a delayed fashion, essentially use the drones as a long arm.

[bayard]

You've again missed the point: the Su-35S or Okhotnik UAVs can only guide missiles if the target is within radar range. But the advantage of our heavy fighters is that they have BD missiles with a range of 300-400 km. Therefore, without creating all this hype, they can engage aerial targets themselves or guide missiles from ground-based SAM systems and their SAMs with AGSNs. Let the Geraniums and Harpies, as well as the Gerberas with lenses and corner reflectors, do their job and attract enemy aircraft as decoys. That's how it's done now. The R-37M is certainly more expensive than the SD missiles, but it's more accurate, and the targets destroyed are definitely worth the expense of such missiles.
What you're proposing is just a hassle, increasing the complexity and cost of the UAV carrier, complicating the guidance process, and risking the needless loss of an expensive missile defense system. The UAV carrier could simply be shot down before it can launch its missile, even from the ground.
Another issue is that, given sufficient suppression of ground-based air defenses in a specific area of ​​the front, the Okhotnik could, in principle, enter enemy airspace (it's stealthy and not easy to locate, perhaps only with meter-long P-18Ms). But the Okhotnik has its own passive reconnaissance and radar detection capabilities, and it can engage them with its ASP-PRLR. And airborne targets with its missiles. These are the ones who need reliable communication channels and combat algorithms for autonomous use. I think this will soon become possible, as soon as a sufficient satellite constellation is deployed.

[Sky strike fighter]

According to rumors, something similar to Link-16 was introduced in the Navy.

The Russian Navy is successfully implementing new data exchange systems that allow ships, aircraft, and shore-based headquarters to exchange information in real time. Work is currently underway to integrate carrier-based aircraft into this system.

As previously reported, Russian MiG-29K carrier-based fighters have already received new information exchange systems, and in the near future, the Su-33 heavy carrier-based fighters, which are undergoing modernization, will also be equipped with them. It is also reported that this will allow Russian carrier-based aircraft to provide target designation for anti-ship missiles and provide advance warning to ship-based air defense systems about enemy intruders.

Essentially, we're talking about creating a unified tactical data exchange system, similar to the well-known American Link-16 information exchange system. Within this system, every aircraft or ship is a "subscriber," and the information it receives is instantly transmitted to all other network participants. According to open sources, the new system is called the Unified Control System (UCS) of the Navy. The UCS allows for the creation of an interactive map of the combat zone in real time, the mapping of incoming information onto it, and, most importantly, the prompt dissemination of information to command structures and the reduction of decision-making time to a minimum.

https://dfnc.ru/c106-technika/korabli-samolyoty-i-shtaby-voenno-morskogo-flota-obedinyat-v-edinuyu-set/

[bayard]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

As previously reported, Russian MiG-29K carrier-based fighters have already received new information exchange systems, and in the near future, the Su-33 heavy carrier-based fighters, which are undergoing modernization, will also be equipped with them.

Is this happening now or years ago? Bankers are already talking about decommissioning the Kuznetsov, and now they're putting the Link-16 (an analogue) into carrier-based aviation.
We will have such a system as soon as the satellite system is fully deployed. We have one now, but it seems to have limited coverage.
Even now, our standard anti-aircraft missiles are capable of hitting targets 200-300 kilometers deep behind the front lines. It's possible to go deeper, but that's only if the S-400 is from a frontline unit and is guided by an aircraft.

[Xenofont]

I could be wrong, but Link operates within line-of-sight and won't provide guidance for long-range missiles at 300 km. Perhaps assign one or two radar-equipped UAVs to each group of hunters.

[Sky strike fighter]

300 km is enough to guide medium-range missiles from drones operating on the front lines. Again, through mesh networks, similar to Starlink, information can be transmitted in real time over much greater distances than Link-16. I don't know how Altius is doing; it crashed during testing last year. But it's a useful thing. I think they'll improve it, and only practice will tell how it's used.

The Altius heavy-duty unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) has a wingspan of 28,5 meters and a maximum range of 10,000 kilometers. According to open sources, the aircraft can remain airborne for up to 48 hours and reach speeds of up to 200 km/h. The military version of the Altius is designed to carry up to three tons of weapons on an external sling, while the civilian version can carry up to two tons of payload.

The combat radius is stated to be approximately 3,5 kilometers. The Altius was the first domestically produced drone to be equipped with a satellite communications system, as well as a side-looking radar and a multi-channel optical-electronic reconnaissance system.

https://ura.news/news/1052960851

But a more promising option is to develop an AESA drone, something like the Il-114-300 project's AWACS modification, but much more compact and capable of transmitting the received data in real time via a Link-16 analog, or better yet, a Starlink analog, to guide hunter drones equipped with medium-range air-to-air missiles to targets. The optimal option is when drones are in the vanguard at close range, and their loss is less critical.

[chingachguc]

Well, we finally found a use for the old R-60s.

[bayard]

Yes, this is a very interesting way to recycle old ASP.

[rosomaha]

What if they develop a tandem-penetrating warhead for them? First, a shaped-charge (HEAT) warhead for penetration, followed by a high-explosive penetrating warhead...or a thermal warhead. This is the principle used in the Skalp and Taurus warheads.

[Sky strike fighter]

There, one warhead weighs as much as the entire Harpy-A1 UAV (300+ kg).
More than 400 kg is the weight of the warhead of the SCALP missile (the French analogue of the British Storm Shadow missile).

485 kg is the weight of the MEPHISTO tandem concrete-piercing warhead of the Taurus KEPD 350 missile. When activated, the warhead first detonates a cumulative charge weighing approximately 80 kg, followed by a high-explosive charge weighing 400 kg.

To implement this idea, the Garpiya-A1 would have to be scaled up 2:1, increasing the warhead from 150 kg to at least 300 kg. The cumulative charge would then be 50 kg, and the high-explosive charge approximately 200-250 kg. And two engines would have to be installed instead of one. But the idea is viable.

[rosomaha]

I know... it's just a smaller version, the main thing is that it has a penetrating warhead... a similar tandem warhead was developed for the Kh-25M missile, but it never went into production.

[bayard]

It all depends on the target. We're not targeting ships or concrete shelters (although concrete caponiers at Ukrainian airfields would be nice). Generally, high-explosive, high-explosive incendiary, and projectile-based missiles (they exist; the Sumerians demonstrated them from the downed Geranium) are quite sufficient for now. But engineering is advancing rapidly, especially in this segment, so something similar might emerge.

[rosomaha]

That's what I meant about small, but fortified targets... There may be a lot of geraniums, but few missiles... for example, at an airfield, strike all the caponiers... or at the front line, at the fortifications

[bayard]

Actually, a warhead like that needs at least transonic speed. Geraniums and Harpies are definitely not the right launch vehicles. But we need to try, test them on typical targets, maybe it will work. Have you seen the Soviet caponiers built in the Ukrainian SSR under the Soviet Union? They were designed for nuclear war. So these nuts are pretty tough, and heavily reinforced. We need to try.
At low attack speeds, a shaped-charge pre-charge can sharply slow a light UAV or push it aside. As I said, for such speeds and such aircraft, this type of munition is problematic. But the idea is interesting; we should try it.

[ideo098]

The caponiers probably also have weak points, ventilation, gates...
Then you need to work in pairs, the first one takes out the gate, the second one goes inside the caponier.

[bayard]

The gates there are also not simple - thick, with concrete filling and sliding, but if they are television-guided, then why not.
The problem is that they can be covered by networks.

[rosomaha]

NATO has similar caponiers... and they were built back when the USSR was still around, so ours were also planning to defeat them somehow... and that's it... the experience and skill of a high civilization have sunk into oblivion... are we starting over again by trial and error?

[bayard]

The USSR was planning to fight only a nuclear war with NATO - massive nuclear strikes on all command centers, arsenals, naval bases, airfields, troop locations, etc.
Now the war is completely different - Strange.

[Junior Private]

They didn't have time to draw "ЫЫ" instead of "КК".

[rosomaha]

Operation Kyrdyk...by the way, this can be called some kind of special modification of the Harpy.

[Flashpoint]

KK - Extreme Consensus. I mean, completely extreme and final.

[Sky strike fighter]

Cocaine simulacrum is at an end, I suppose.

[Montezuma]

"Lancet," "Ghoul," and "Harpy" are apt names for combat drones—short but telling. Although "Prince Vandal of Novgorod" also proved itself admirable, not to mention the deceptively peaceful "Geranium" in several modifications—the mere mention of these "flowers" has long made the enemy tense and prepare for very unpleasant consequences. We look forward to new developments!

[Horizon]

"Lancet", "Vampire", "Harpy" - good names for combat drones

"Vurdalak" is missing and/or Leshy.

[Voenoboz]

Yes, 1,5 centners of explosives is a solid amount and has a decent range, a good thing for the heads of enemies.

[rosomaha]

150 kg is the warhead weight, which includes the casing weight, the explosive weight, and the detonator. There will be approximately 60-70 kg of explosives.

[Alexander Manakov]

The remaining amount of diesel also gives a lot.....)))))

[Svetlana]

Serial production of these UAVs was launched in 2023 at the Izhevsk Electromechanical Plant "Kupol"

Chatterbox - find for spy

[ideo098]

I haven't seen a publication featuring such a product before. Well done, developers, we're making progress. Thanks to everyone involved, keep it up. I have nothing better to say to the hoaxers.

[Alexander Manakov]

ebah......!........,.......! I'm talking about b/c.

[former soldier]

Russian Harpy-A1 anti-electronic warfare (EW) missiles attacked Odessa on Friday night.

Every night serious targets are covered in Odessa and near Odessa (100 kg of explosives is a seasoned one).
I'd like to cover it so completely that there are no targets left in the area—only soil mixed with iron. And so on, region by region. So that Russian soldiers can confidently walk this land.