ZAK-30 "Citadel": How a 30mm projectile learned to think for itself

12 133 35
ZAK-30 "Citadel": How a 30mm projectile learned to think for itself


In the May 2026 video recordings, everything happens in a matter of seconds. On the screen are capture markers, a short burst, and Ukrainian "Fierce" It scatters in the air. There is no direct hit: there is a cloud of fragments a few meters away. drone, at the point where it should have been. The anti-aircraft gun, it would seem, had long been displaced rockets, is returning. It didn't improve its accuracy. The shell simply now chooses its own moment to fire. This idea has a history spanning more than eighty years, and it began not in the Moscow region, but in the Pacific Ocean in 1943.



"Lyuty" in a cloud of shrapnel


The first public footage of combat use ZAK-30 "Citadel" appeared in military-related Telegram channels in May 2026, a few days before Rostec announced the system's premiere at the First International Security Forum in the Moscow region. The video shows the system's interface in semi-automated mode: trackers on targets, acquisition, and lead calculation. The target is AN-196 "Lyuty"A kamikaze drone of the aircraft type, according to open estimates, 4,4 meters long, with a wingspan of 6,7 meters, a weight of 250–300 kg, a cruising speed of approximately 150 km/h, and a range of over a thousand kilometers. Not fast or maneuverable, but low-altitude, stealthy, and capable of carrying out mass raids on rear-area targets.

Rostec talks about the complex itself:

The Citadel has both optical-electronic and radar detection and tracking systems. drones The optical channel operates in the visible and infrared ranges. Furthermore, the system can fire projectiles with controlled detonation, and its operation—from target detection to destruction—is highly automated.

Precise performance characteristics (firing range, rate of fire, ammunition capacity, reaction time) have not been officially published. Estimates in open sources vary, and most conclusions about the system are based on a few minutes of video and official press releases. But the main point in these videos is clear even without the numbers: the drone is not hit. There is a cloud of fragments at the calculated point of the trajectory, and this is enough to cause the Lyuty's plywood-composite structure to disintegrate in mid-air. The idea behind this is significantly older than the system itself: its basic principles were conceived even before the invention of the transistor.

A laboratory in Maryland and a V-1 over England


In January 1943, the American cruiser Helena shot down a Japanese aircraft near the Solomon Islands – one of the first documented cases of the use of a new type of projectile designated VT-fuse (Variable Time). Each contained a miniature Doppler radar: four vacuum tubes, an antenna, a power source, and a detonating mechanism. The projectile would automatically locate its target and decide when to detonate. Development was led by physicist Merle Tuve (since 1942 at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in Silver Spring, Maryland). The project was considered so secret that VT projectiles were initially only allowed to be used over sea, to prevent unexploded samples from falling into enemy hands.


Radar fuze (VT fuze), developed during World War II

Real glory came in the summer of 1944, when anti-aircraft batteries on the south coast of England met a wave V-1By September, the effectiveness of the projectiles had increased exponentially compared to projectiles with a conventional time fuse: cruise missiles were no longer shot down by hundreds, but by dozens. Before the VT, anti-aircraft gunners set the detonation time before firing, using firing tables and a stopwatch; now the projectile itself knew when the target was close.


ZSU-23-4 Shilka

The Soviet school chose the opposite path – the density of fire. C-60 (The 57-mm AZP-57 anti-aircraft gun, part of a battery system, was adopted in 1950) still maintained the classic design with radar guidance and a conventional projectile. But then the emphasis shifted radically. ZSU-23-4 «Shilka» (1962) – four 23-mm barrels, up to 3400 rounds per minute per installation, 1RL33 radar as part of the RPK-2 Tobol radio-instrument complex. Marine AK-630 (adopted into service in 1976) is a six-barreled artillery mount capable of firing up to 5000 rounds per minute. The projectile is a standard high-explosive fragmentation shell, without any electronics. The principle is the same: to create a wall of fire that a small target cannot penetrate.


AK-630M

The VT and AK-630 have the same mission—shooting down a small aerial target—but they accomplish it with diametrically different means: one smart projectile versus five thousand simple ones per minute. By the 2020s, both schools of thought had hit a wall. Missiles aren't available for every drone; they're more expensive than the drones themselves. And they push through a wall of fire with sheer mass; five thousand rounds per minute sound impressive until there are fifty targets in the sky at once.

AHEAD: Intelligence from a Projectile to a Ground-Based Computer


The third move was first found by the Swiss Oerlikon Contraves (joined by Rheinmetall in 1999). Ammunition AHEAD (Advanced Hit Efficiency and Destruction), perfected by the late 1990s: 35 mm, with 152 tungsten fragments inside, and an electronic timer in the tail. The key here is this: the detonation intelligence was moved from the shell to a ground-based computer, externally, near the gun barrel. Induction coils are located at the muzzle; as the shell passes through, the fire control system measures its initial velocity and records the precise time to detonation, calculated using radar data, in the timer. The shell is inexpensive: no radar, no target sensor, just a timer and propellant.


A programmable projectile using AHEAD (Advanced Hit Efficiency and Destruction) technology.

With AHEAD, the barrel-mounted anti-aircraft gun has become popular again. German MANTIS (in service since 2011, airbase protection) - six separate 35-mm artillery mounts (Revolver Gun) with programmable ammunition, rate of about 1000 rounds per minute per barrel. Marine Skyshield, recent wheeled Skyranger 30 already on the 30-mm AHEAD, with the addition of small SADM missiles from MBDA. By the mid-2020s, Germany's Nah- und Nächstbereichsschutz program effectively cemented the C-RAM gun layer as a standard element of the echeloned Defense.


Skyranger 30

The Citadel is based on the same concept, but with its own unique solutions. Caliber: 30 mm; according to some observers, it is based on the Spica module (in some publications with the index BM-30-D) with a 2A42 automatic cannon (Instrument Design Bureau, Tula, in production since the early 1980s, the base weapon of the BMP-2, Mi-28, and a good half of ground vehicles). Rostec has not officially confirmed this. The 2A42's rate of fire is 200-300 rounds per minute at low rates and 550-800 at high rates, compared to 1,000 rounds per barrel for the 35mm Oerlikon. For the classic C-RAM mission of repelling a salvo of rockets, this is insufficient. The programmable projectile partially compensates for the difference: fewer shots, but each one is smarter. Whether this makes up for the difference against truly massive air strikes is an open question.


Layout module BM-30-D arr. 2016 Photo by Central Research Institute Burevestnik

How exactly the Citadel programs the fuse is unclear from open sources. Some publications describe the system as laser-based: a pulse encoding the detonation time is transmitted to a receiver in the shell. Other observers suggest an induction system similar to AHEAD; both are technically possible with a 30mm caliber. The logic is the same in any case: the shell only needs to count the milliseconds and detonate the charge at the desired point.

Each of the three elements of the Citadel was conceived before it. That the projectile should automatically detect the moment of detonation was realized back in the 1940s with the VT. That it's more convenient to load time directly into it at the muzzle was figured out at Oerlikon in the late 1990s. So, all that remains of the Citadel is automatic target tracking, which media reports refer to as artificial intelligence. The video does indeed show trackers, classification, and automatic target acquisition. It's impossible to say from open sources what exactly the neural network does, or whether it does anything at all. It's a convenient term, but impossible to verify.

Cheap Shot and the Limits of the Concept


The main argument in favor of a cannon-based anti-drone layer is the cost per shot. A modern anti-aircraft missile, even a short-range one, costs tens of thousands of dollars; a programmable artillery A shot is an order of magnitude cheaper. With massive drone strikes, this ceases to be a pleasant bonus and becomes a condition for the system's existence: missile ammunition runs out before the drones do.

Rheinmetall's Skyranger 30, the American M-SHORAD program (Stryker with the XM914 30mm cannon), Korea's Hanwha with a programmable 30mm munition, the next-generation MANTIS in the German Nah- und Nächstbereichsschutz program with a 2028 target date, BAE Systems with its own variant—the list goes on. So, Citadel is more of a follower than a pioneer: the same challenge—making a programmable round less expensive than a conventional one—is being tackled in parallel in several countries, and it hasn't yet been fully resolved.

What the system can do is serve as the last line of defense for a specific facility. Its effective range, judging by similar systems with a 30mm cannon and an optical-electronic station, is approximately one to two kilometers. Long-range missiles are still held by the Pantsir-S, S-300, and S-400 systems. EW and fighter aviation"Citadel" is already working in the inner ring, due to what has broken through.

There are plenty of open questions. The main one is throughput: how many targets the system can track and engage simultaneously. This figure hasn't been published, but it determines what would happen during a truly massive attack: twenty to thirty Lyuty missiles at a single point from different directions. Then there's the performance of the optical channel in smoke, under laser illumination, and when operating under electronic warfare jamming; nothing is mentioned in the publicly available materials. The actual operational statistics are a few videos and a press release, which can't be used to judge either the average round rate per target or the tracking failure rate. This is the normal state of knowledge about the system just revealed, and it will change within the next year or two, either through official data or through what the other side begins to publish.
35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. +4
        26 May 2026 05: 21
        God grant!
        From the article
        The distant echelons still holdPantsir-S, S-300 and S-400,

        I think the Pantsi-S is redundant on this list. The classic air defense echelon lineup looks different:
        Aviation – S-400 – S-300 – Buk (various modifications) – Tor-M, and only then the Pantsir-S, on par with the Citadel. Let me remind you that the Pantsir-S originally had a similar 30mm caliber gun. The latest SMK model, however, lacks it, but the appearance of the subject of this article will more than likely force a reconsideration of its design.
        Regards, Kote!
        1. +2
          26 May 2026 05: 58
          The Pantsir has a different gun. The shell is most likely not compatible.
          1. +2
            26 May 2026 07: 07
            There's a reason to modernize and redesign the Pantsir's cannon. The bursts are getting shorter: tracer, programmable, tracer, programmable. Next target.
          2. -1
            26 May 2026 09: 22
            The issue isn't the projectile, but the fuse. What's stopping them from fitting the same 30mm shrapnel shell with a remote detonator into the Pantsir's round?
            1. 0
              26 May 2026 10: 15
              What prevents you from loading a rifle cartridge into a machine gun or pistol of the same caliber?
              And there is also pre-shot programming and other features in the system.
              1. +2
                26 May 2026 11: 51
                Before you write your nonsense, take the time to "smoke" a little on the topic. The Pantsir is armed with a 2A38M twin 30mm cannon.
                Used ammunition
                The 2A38M anti-aircraft gun fires high-explosive incendiary and high-explosive tracer rounds. These rounds are also included in the ammunition complement of the 2A42 30mm automatic cannon.

                WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS?!
                1. The comment was deleted.
          3. 0
            27 May 2026 09: 48
            The principle of the Pantsir cannon is to create a cloud of projectiles, since they do not fly precisely to the target like a thread (like the Americans), but with a wide dispersion. A programmable projectile is not needed here, although it would be nice, since the cloud, when approaching the target, will be denser.
        2. +2
          26 May 2026 10: 29
          Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
          I think the Pantsi-S is redundant on this list. The classic air defense echelon lineup looks different:
          Aviation - S-400 - S-300 - Buk (various modifications) - Tor-M and only then Pantsir-S, on the same line with Citadel.

          No, the Pantsir isn't exactly out of place here. The Buks and Tors are the ones that don't belong. smile
          Let me remind you that the USSR and the Russian Federation divided their air defense forces into the country's air defense forces (now part of the Aerospace Forces) and the military air defense forces (part of the Ground Forces).
          Military S-300V, Buks and Tors are the front line and frontline areas.
          The country is protected by the Aerospace Forces' air defense forces (which overlap with the Ground Forces' air defense forces in the frontline zone). With few exceptions, they only have S-300, S-400, a few S-500, and Pantsir missiles. In some places, there are mixed formations of Aerospace Forces and Ground Forces air defense systems (in Kaliningrad, if I remember correctly), but army systems are not particularly well suited for 24/7 operation.
        3. The comment was deleted.
        4. +1
          26 May 2026 14: 55
          It doesn't have a ballistic computer, it's based on the density of fire
        5. 0
          27 May 2026 09: 46
          In fact, Tor and Pantsir-S are from the same category: close-range weapons (not counting the cannon), the last resort of air defense.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. +3
    26 May 2026 05: 44
    This is the normal state of knowledge about the system just shown., and it will change within the next year or two: either due to official data or due to what the other side starts posting.

    The main thing is that it appears in physical form and is not auctioned off for currency to other "friendly" countries...
  4. +3
    26 May 2026 07: 25
    What a mess. The author mixed up a projectile with a preset remote detonation and a projectile with a radar fuse, to begin with, and then for some reason brought in the Soviet small-caliber anti-aircraft gun as a negative example, forgetting that Western small-caliber anti-aircraft guns also had neither remote nor radar fuses—for the relevant period, of course.
    1. 0
      26 May 2026 08: 36
      There was once an article on VO about how the Americans developed an anti-aircraft shell with a remote detonation during WWII.
      They passed the technology on to the British, but did not give it to their allies, the USSR.
      Does anyone know how to find this material?
      I would read it again with pleasure.
      1. +1
        26 May 2026 08: 51
        Quote: Blacksmith 55
        Does anyone know how to find this material?

        In principle, there is a keyword search on the site, it’s not perfect, but it works.
        And so:
        https://topwar.ru/188802-distancionnyj-vzryvatel-v-vov.html
    2. +2
      26 May 2026 10: 40
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      It's a bit of a mess. The author mixed up a projectile with a remotely detonated fuse and a projectile with a radar fuse, for starters.

      And missed a great chance to declare "This idea has a history that spans one hundred and fifty years, and it began in the 19th century with projectiles with remote tubes. ". smile
      After all, in essence, the AHEAD system is a good old automatic tube inserter, but not mechanical, but electronic.
  5. +1
    26 May 2026 07: 53
    It's a shame the information is so limited. At least the price and production availability were mentioned.
    1. +1
      26 May 2026 08: 43
      Quote: garri-lin
      It's a shame the information is so limited. At least the price and production availability were mentioned.

      Zakhikhlyatsky BTVT writes about 600 million. Most likely a lie.
      Or he confused the development for the cost of one set.
      1. -1
        26 May 2026 09: 37
        Well, here you can only trust the official statement. The rest will 99 percent be disinformation designed to "cancel" the good news.
        The fact that officials are silent is a big mistake.
  6. 0
    26 May 2026 08: 57
    The author cleverly mixed a pie with a pickle! A remote "programmer" and a proximity fuse all rolled into one! Considering reports of actual development of 30mm shells in Russia with a remotely programmable fuse (RPF), and even the production of pilot batches of such shells, it's safe to say that the Citadel uses exactly these shells! 30mm shells with proximity fuses (NKV) are currently in the minority, but they are better in anti-aircraft performance, in my opinion! But there are no such shells in Russia... there have been no reports of the development of ammunition of this type! Shells (of any caliber) with RPFs are good when fired at stationary (slow-moving) targets! But anti-aircraft shells with RPFs at high-speed, highly maneuverable air targets? I don't think that's the best direction! This is simply a modern variation of the anti-aircraft shells from the first half of the 20th century with a remote-controlled tube! And shells with a remote-controlled tube proved to be an innovation compared to the "tubes"! The effectiveness of anti-aircraft shells with remote-controlled tubes will be lower than shells with a remote-controlled tube! It is precisely the remote-controlled tube shells that "decide" when to explode! As the author put it...
    1. +1
      26 May 2026 10: 44
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Shells (of any caliber) with a DPV are good for firing at stationary (slow-moving) targets! But anti-aircraft shells with a DPV against high-speed, highly maneuverable aerial targets? I don't think that's the best approach!

      So the main targets of our air defense now are slow and non-maneuverable - large UAVs.
      The article states this directly:
      The target is the AN-196 "Lyuty": a kamikaze drone of the fixed-wing type, according to open estimates, 4,4 meters long, with a wingspan of 6,7 meters, weighing 250–300 kg, cruising speed of approximately 150 km/h, and a range of over 1,000 kilometers. It's neither fast nor maneuverable, but it's low-altitude, stealthy, and capable of carrying out mass raids on rear-area targets.

      However, high-speed targets, such as cruise missiles and, to some extent, ballistic missiles, are also not particularly maneuverable.
    2. +1
      26 May 2026 10: 56
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      And the NKV shells turned out to be an innovation compared to the "tubes"! The effectiveness of anti-aircraft shells with DPV will be lower compared to shells with NKV! It is precisely the NKV shells that "decide" when to explode! As the author put it...

      The efficiency will differ only slightly.
      If the target maneuvers, both the projectile with the DPV and the projectile with the NKV will miss—because both are ballistically flying toward a calculated impact point. Yes, the projectile with the NKV can still hit the maneuvering target with the edge of the fuze's DN—but this means that after detonation, it will also hit it with the edge of the fragmentation field.
      1. +1
        26 May 2026 17: 15
        For derivation, they made a guided missile that would not only explode in the right place but also be able to reach that spot. But where is this derivation?
      2. -1
        26 May 2026 20: 53
        How! I've said it all! "HechatUelo! stop I will not make excuses or explain myself! No. I stand by my opinion... Yes Let's chew and see who is right and who is wrong!
  7. +3
    26 May 2026 09: 36
    The effective zone, judging by analogs with a 30-mm cannon and an optical-electronic station, is about one to two kilometers.

    The "Derivatsiya," with its 57mm cannon and guided-fuze projectile, could have doubled that range at least, not to mention its larger area of ​​effect.
    But somehow they still haven't calved with her. sad
    1. +1
      26 May 2026 17: 18
      But somehow they still haven't calved with her.
      I think they haven't been working for a long time, but were quietly closed like other projects from the Shoigu era. request
  8. -1
    26 May 2026 12: 33
    To make a shot less expensive than a standard one, a fuse must be designed that operates on the principle of a laser rangefinder. The laser and receiver are located in a "well" positioned at an angle to the projectile's longitudinal axis. This creates a cone of light swept by the laser in front of the projectile during flight. The projectile spins very quickly, so the target will be hit by the laser several dozen (or hundreds) times before the fuse is triggered. For operation in smoke and fog, the laser can be infrared.
    Since the fragmentation radius of a 30mm shell is small, the laser shouldn't be too powerful (somewhere on par with a laser pointer or even less). If the laser isn't very powerful, it will likely only be able to operate at extremely low altitudes, ignoring ground effects. Otherwise, a processor will have to be added to differentiate between reflections from point targets and area targets, which will significantly increase the cost.
    1. 0
      27 May 2026 08: 47
      Andrey, I think your reasoning has fallen into a propaganda trap peddled by "effective" military-industrial complex managers and all sorts of quasi-military "experts." I believe the real problem with creating effective domestic last-line air defense systems isn't the lack of remotely programmable detonation munitions, but rather the simple lack of the necessary domestic microelectronic components in sufficient quantities. Look at the PLA's experience; they're doing just fine without such munitions. Recently, information surfaced online about field tests of the Chinese Type 625E system against a swarm of 20 drones, which destroyed them all automatically in almost one minute.
  9. +2
    26 May 2026 13: 13
    Each contained a miniature Doppler radar: four vacuum tubes, an antenna, a power source, and a detonating mechanism. The projectile automatically sensed its target and decided when to detonate.

    If the system used the Doppler effect, then the triggering occurred at the moment when the target reflecting the waves stopped approaching and began to move away.
    Is it really impossible to build something inexpensive using this principle using modern components? The power consumption and the device's volume should be reduced, so it could be powered using something other than an electrolyte ampoule. When the first radio-controlled fuses were made, the piezoelectric effect wasn't widely used yet. What if we used it now—cheap and cheerful? Millions of disposable lighters are made using it.
    1. +1
      26 May 2026 17: 35
      For a long time, they couldn't build hangars at a modern base; money flowed in, but hangars didn't appear. And "cheap" doesn't even apply to the military; Fighterbomber wrote that screwdrivers were bought for $5,000 for the air force.
  10. +1
    26 May 2026 15: 16
    During the projectile's flight, a maneuvering target can deviate significantly from the intended "meeting point" at the moment of firing, so it would be quite reasonable to have a radio-command fuse (not a radar one) for use against ground/surface targets. On the topic of radar initiators, there's an informative article on the English-language wiki, Proximity_fuze, and a good publication was also published here on Obozrenie.
  11. 0
    26 May 2026 15: 19
    I would like to believe that the fate of this complex will be more successful than that of the once-promoted but later forgotten "Air Defense Derivation"! request hi good
  12. 0
    26 May 2026 16: 54
    The key factor will be price. We need to make this system so cheap that we can produce it not in the thousands, but in the tens of thousands, because there are so many objects. If this is achieved, drones like Lyuty will disappear from thin air.
  13. 0
    26 May 2026 20: 57
    The nitpicking nonsense is starting again. Make a system for at least one target, then you can improve it. And one more thing. I clearly remember reading about Swedish projectiles with a programmable detonation time back in 1978. Am I from a parallel world?
  14. +1
    26 May 2026 22: 45
    The Soviet school chose the opposite path – the density of fire.
    You're talking about a completely different caliber: the 127mm gun had a radio fuse, while the Shilka had a 23mm. The Americans didn't have radio fuses in the 20mm either.
    The author also failed to clearly reflect one important thing: for a radio detonator to work, a working radar is required.
  15. 0
    31 May 2026 03: 32
    Why not use a magnet on a spring like in AHEAD shells? Take a gun of any caliber and install an electromagnet at the beginning and end. The first electromagnet is needed to release the safety catch and fully cock the spring before firing, and the second electromagnet is needed to set the projectile's flight time to the target and the lead. To measure the projectile's velocity, we install two Hall sensors at the very end.