Military Review

On the fight against unmanned aerial vehicles

169
Unmanned aerial vehicles found their place in the armed forces of different countries and firmly occupied it, having “mastered” several specializations. The similar equipment is applied to the solution of the most different tasks in various conditions. It is expected that the development of unmanned systems has become a specific challenge requiring an answer. To counteract an adversary that has unmanned aerial systems of various purposes in service, it needs funds capable of finding such a threat and eliminating it. As a result, recently, when creating new protection systems, special attention has been paid to countering UAVs.


The most obvious and effective way to counter the UAV is the detection of such equipment with subsequent destruction. To solve this problem can be used as existing samples of military equipment, modified accordingly, and new systems. For example, the domestic air defense systems of the latest models in the course of development or updating have the ability to track not only airplanes or helicopters, but also unmanned aerial vehicles. Also provides support and destruction of such objects. Depending on the type and characteristics of the target, a variety of air defense systems with different characteristics can be used.

One of the main issues in the destruction of enemy equipment is its detection, followed by tracking. The structure of most modern types of anti-aircraft systems includes radar detection stations with various characteristics. The probability of detecting an air target depends on some parameters, primarily on its effective dispersion area (ESR). Relatively large UAVs are characterized by greater EPR, which facilitates their detection. In the case of small-sized devices, including those built with extensive use of plastics, the ESR decreases, and the task of detection is seriously complicated.


General Atomics MQ-1 Predator - one of the most famous UAV of our time. Photo of Wikimedia Commons


However, when creating advanced air defense tools, measures are being taken to improve detection performance. This development leads to the expansion of the EPR ranges and target velocities at which it can be detected and taken for tracking. The latest domestic and foreign air defense systems and other air defense systems are able to deal not only with large targets in the form of manned aircraft, but also with drones. In recent years, this quality has become mandatory for new systems, and therefore is always mentioned in promotional materials for promising samples.

After detecting a potentially dangerous target, it should identify it and determine which object entered the airspace. The correct solution of such a task will make it possible to determine the need for an attack, as well as to establish target characteristics necessary for choosing the right weapon. In some cases, the correct choice of means of destruction can be associated not only with the excessive consumption of inappropriate ammunition, but also with the negative consequences of a tactical nature.

After successful detection and recognition of enemy technology, the air defense system must carry out the attack and destroy it. To do this, use weapons that match the type of target detected. For example, large UAVs of reconnaissance or attack purposes, which are at a high altitude, should be hit with anti-aircraft missiles. In the case of low-altitude and low-speed light-class vehicles, it makes sense to use barreled weapons with the appropriate ammunition. In particular, artillery systems with controlled remote disruption have great potential in the fight against UAVs.

An interesting feature of modern unmanned aerial vehicles, which should be considered when countering such systems, is the direct dependence of size, range and payload. Thus, light vehicles can operate at distances of no more than a few tens or hundreds of kilometers from the operator, and their payload consists only of reconnaissance equipment. Heavy vehicles, in turn, are able to go a greater distance and carry not only optical-electronic systems, but also weapons.


ZRPK "Pantsir-С1". Photo author


As a result, an effective air defense system capable of covering large areas with a set of anti-aircraft weapons with different parameters and different radii of action turns out to be a rather effective means of countering the enemy’s unmanned technology. In this case, the elimination of large devices will be the task of long-range complexes, and small-radius systems will be able to protect the covered area from light UAVs.

More complex targets are lightweight drones, characterized by their small size and low ESR. Nevertheless, there are already some systems capable of fighting this technique, producing detection and attacking it. One of the newest models of such systems is the Pantsir-С1 anti-aircraft missile system. It has several different means of detection, targeting and armament, which ensure the destruction of air targets, including small-sized ones, which are particularly difficult for anti-aircraft systems.

The Pantsir-C1 combat vehicle carries an 1PC1-1Е early-warning radar based on a phased array antenna capable of tracking the entire surrounding area. There is also a target tracking station 1PC2-E, the task of which is to continuously monitor the detected object and further missile guidance. If necessary, an optoelectronic detection station can be used that is capable of detecting and tracking targets.

According to reports, the Pantsir-С1 air-defense missile system is capable of detecting large air targets at distances up to 80 km. In case the target has an ESR at the level of 2 sq. M, detection and tracking is provided at the 36 and 30 km ranges, respectively. For objects with an EPR of 0,1 sq. M, the range of damage reaches 20 km. It is reported that the minimum effective scattering area of ​​the target, in which the Pantsyrya-C1 radar is capable of detecting, reaches the 2-3 square cm, but at the same time, the work range does not exceed several kilometers.


Armament complex "Pantsir-C1". In the center of the tracking radar, on either side of it 30-mm guns and containers (empty) guided missiles. Photo author


The characteristics of the radar stations allow the Pantsir-С1 complex to find and take to support targets of various sizes with different EPR parameters. In particular, there is the possibility of detecting and tracking small reconnaissance vehicles. After determining the parameters of the target and deciding on its destruction, the calculation of the complex has the opportunity to choose the most effective means of destruction.

For larger targets, guided missiles 57E6E and 9М335 can be used. These products are built on a two-stage bicalyber scheme and are capable of hitting targets at altitudes up to 18 km and a distance of 20 km. The maximum speed of the attacked target reaches 1000 m / s. Targets in the near zone can be destroyed with the help of two double-barreled anti-aircraft gun 2А38 of caliber 30 mm. Four barrels are capable of a total of up to 5 thousand shots per minute and attack targets at distances up to 4 km.

In theory, countermeasures to drones, including light ones, can be carried out with the help of other short-range anti-aircraft systems. If necessary, the existing complex can be upgraded using new means of detection and tracking, the characteristics of which ensure the work with the UAV. However, at present it is proposed not only to improve existing systems, but also to create completely new ones, including those based on principles of operation that are unusual for the armed forces.

In 2014, the US Navy and Kratos Defense & Security Solutions upgraded the USS Ponce (LPD-15) landing craft, during which it received new weapons and related equipment. The ship was equipped with an AN / SEQ-3 Laser Weapon System or XN-1 LaWS. The main element of the new complex is a solid-state infrared laser of adjustable power, capable of "producing" up to 30 kW.


The combat module of the XN-1 LaWS system of American development on the deck of the USS Ponce (LPD-15). Photo of Wikimedia Commons


It is assumed that the complex XN-1 LaWS can be used by naval forces for self-defense against unmanned vehicles and small surface targets. By changing the energy of the "shot" can be adjusted to the degree of impact on the target. Thus, low-power modes will be able to temporarily disable the observation system of the enemy apparatus, and the full power allows you to count on physical damage to individual elements of the target. Thus, the laser system is able to protect the ship from various threats, featuring a certain flexibility of application.

Tests of the AN / SEQ-3 laser complex were initiated in the middle of the 2014 year. Initially, the system was used with the power limit of the “shot” to 10 kW. In the future, it was planned to conduct a series of inspections with a gradual increase in capacity. The estimated 30 kW was planned to be released in the 2016 year. Interestingly, during the early stages of testing the laser complex, the carrier ship was sent to the Persian Gulf. Part of the tests took place off the shores of the Middle East.

It is planned that if it is necessary to combat the UAV, the shipborne laser complex will be used to destroy individual elements of the enemy equipment or to completely disable it. In the first case, the laser will be able to "blind" or render the optical-electronic systems used to control the drone and receive intelligence information. At maximum power and in some situations, the laser can even cause damage to various parts of the device, which will not allow it to continue to perform tasks.

It is noteworthy that the laser systems to combat UAVs are not only interested in the Navy, but also in the US Army. Thus, in the interests of the army, Boeing is developing a pilot project for Compact Laser Weapon Systems (CLWS). The objective of this project is to create a small-sized laser weapon system, which can be transported using light technology or by a two-person crew. The result of the design work was the emergence of a complex consisting of two main units and a power source.

On the fight against unmanned aerial vehicles
Complex Boeing CLWS in working position. Photo Boeing.com


The CLWS complex is equipped with a laser power of only 2 kW, which made it possible to achieve acceptable combat characteristics with compact dimensions. Nevertheless, despite the lower power in comparison with other similar complexes, the CLWS system is capable of solving the assigned combat missions. The capabilities of the complex to combat unmanned aerial vehicles was confirmed in practice last year.

In August last year, during the Black Dart exercise, tests of the CLWS complex took place in conditions close to real ones. The training and combat task of the calculation was the detection, support and destruction of small-sized UAVs. The CLWS automation system successfully took a target to accompany the target in the form of a classic layout apparatus, and then directed the laser beam to the tail of the target. As a result of exposure of the plastic aggregates of the target during 10-15, several parts ignited causing an open flame. The tests were considered successful.

Anti-aircraft systems armed with missiles, guns or lasers can be quite effective means of countering or destroying drones. They allow you to detect targets, take them to escort, and then carry out an attack with subsequent destruction. The result of such work should be the destruction of enemy equipment, stopping the execution of the combat mission.

Nevertheless, other methods of "non-lethal" opposition to the target are possible. For example, laser systems can not only destroy UAVs, but also deprive them of the ability to perform reconnaissance or other tasks by temporarily or permanently disabling optical systems using a high-power beam.


Attack of the UAV system CLWS, shooting in the infrared range. Observed destruction of the target design due to the heating by the laser. Shot from Boeing.com promotional video


There is another way to deal with drones, not implying the destruction of technology. Modern devices with remote control support two-way communication over the air with the operator's console. In this case, the operation of the complex can be disrupted or even eliminated with the help of electronic warfare systems. Modern EW systems can detect and suppress communication and control channels with the help of interference, after which the unmanned complex loses the possibility of full-fledged work. Such an impact does not lead to the destruction of technology, but does not allow it to work and perform its tasks. UAVs can only respond to such a threat in several ways: by protecting the communication channel by adjusting the operating frequency and using automatic operation algorithms in case of loss of communication.

According to some information, the possibility of using electromagnetic systems against drones that hit a target with a powerful impulse is being studied at a theoretical level. There are references to the development of such complexes, although details of such projects, as well as the possibility of their use against UAVs, are not yet available.

Very interesting is the fact that progress in the field of unmanned aerial vehicles has significantly outstripped the development of countermeasures for such equipment. Currently, various countries are armed with a certain number of anti-aircraft complexes of “traditional” classes capable of detecting and attacking drones of different classes with different characteristics. There is also some progress in terms of EW systems. Non-standard and unusual interception systems, in turn, cannot yet leave the test stage of prototypes.

Unmanned technology does not stand still. In many countries of the world, similar systems of all known classes are being developed, and a foundation is being created for the emergence of new unusual complexes. In the future, all these works will lead to the re-equipment of UAV groups with improved technology, including completely new classes. For example, the development of ultra-small devices with a size of no more than a few centimeters and a gram weight is being worked out. Such a development of technology, as well as progress in other areas, impose special requirements on advanced protection systems. The designers of air defense, electronic warfare and other systems now need to take into account new threats in their projects.


On the materials of the sites:
http://ria.ru/
http://tass.ru/
http://popmech.ru/
http://utro.ru/
http://janes.com/
http://boeing.com/
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/
http://globalsecurity.org/
http://armyrecognition.com/
Author:
169 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Operator
    Operator 18 July 2016 06: 25
    +5
    There is no reception against scrap - a small-sized UAV performing the "snake" anti-aircraft maneuver is invulnerable to shells and lasers, and its cost is less than the cost of an anti-aircraft missile.

    The RCS of a small-sized UAV is comparable to the RCS of a bird, which forces you to shoot "a cannon at the sparrows." It remains to introduce a flapping wing for UAVs and location (radar, optical) detection of reconnaissance drones will become impossible.
    1. dmi.pris
      dmi.pris 18 July 2016 07: 08
      +2
      Well, that’s if there is no other scrap. Always action counteracts .. Blasting the charge of warhead missiles of the air defense complex at a distance from the drone will certainly damage it.
      1. Leto
        Leto 18 July 2016 07: 18
        -3
        Quote: dmi.pris
        Undermining the charge of warhead missiles of the air defense complex at a distance from the drone will certainly damage it.

        Probably. As likely, an immediate response in the form of a rocket and most likely not one.
      2. MACCABI-TLV
        MACCABI-TLV 18 July 2016 08: 33
        +1
        Quote: dmi.pris
        Well, that’s if there is no other scrap. Always action counteracts .. Blasting the charge of warhead missiles of the air defense complex at a distance from the drone will certainly damage it.

        just cats are born (c)

        Israel unsuccessfully sent two Patriot missiles to intercept UAVs in the Golan!
        https://news.rambler.ru/middleeast/34207002/?track=topic_newslist
        1. HERMES
          HERMES 18 July 2016 15: 42
          +2
          Quote: MACCABI-TLV
          just cats are born (c)

          Israel unsuccessfully sent two Patriot missiles to intercept UAVs in the Golan!
          https://news.rambler.ru/middleeast/34207002/?track=topic_newslist


          Comrades Jews do not miss the moment to advertise their products))
          1. MACCABI-TLV
            MACCABI-TLV 18 July 2016 16: 59
            +2
            Quote: HERMES
            Comrades Jews do not miss the moment to advertise their products))

            You did not miss the moment to write stupidity.
            Where in the link that I provided is advertised Israeli products?
            "The UAV entered Israeli airspace in the central part of the Golan Heights, the air defense opened fire on the vehicle, which returned to Syria," Lerner said. According to him, two Patriot air defense missiles were launched at the unidentified UAV. "
            And if that, SAM Patriot American products, not Israeli.
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 19 July 2016 22: 00
              0
              This, in my opinion, is just the same from a cannon on sparrows.

              For every little thing, most likely you need something like S-60 + radar + SOU + shells with remote or programmable detonation ... the only how much such a system will cost and how much they need ...

              Another option is the shell - but it doesn’t have a remote shell detonation + the range of the cannon fire is not the same.

              Maybe you need something like a shell, multifunctional, near zone and with a more serious gun.
        2. Alex_Tug
          Alex_Tug 23 July 2016 00: 13
          0
          Israel unsuccessfully sent two Patriot missiles to intercept UAVs in the Golan!


          Read the source. They eliminated the missiles when they understood the Russian drone.
          1. Simpsonian
            Simpsonian 23 July 2016 00: 26
            -1
            Why let two - there were 2 drones? Or do they not like the Iranians?
            1. Alex_Tug
              Alex_Tug 23 July 2016 01: 08
              +1
              Or do they not like the Iranians?

              Hezbollah first decided and pulnuli. Why 2 do not know. The locals said it’s better to (shoot) than to dispose of expired missiles.
              1. Simpsonian
                Simpsonian 23 July 2016 01: 28
                -1
                It’s not local lol
                1. Alex_Tug
                  Alex_Tug 23 July 2016 01: 44
                  0
                  Keep the link
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U5vn9dNhAM
                  The trace of the interrupted flight of the patriet.
                  1. Simpsonian
                    Simpsonian 23 July 2016 02: 22
                    -1
                    Not the fact that it is, and where the second and may have missed?
                    1. Alex_Tug
                      Alex_Tug 23 July 2016 02: 34
                      0
                      where is the second and maybe missed?


                      I also thought so at first, then decided to dig through the primary sources (in the Israeli media for the 19th).
                      There were pictures of the traces of both missiles with the elimination. An explosion of one rocket injured the girl. I don’t know where they dragged the F-16 with the third missile from. But the locals said that a couple of turntables took off, but did not fly anywhere.
                      1. Simpsonian
                        Simpsonian 23 July 2016 05: 31
                        0
                        Well, and what is this self-destruction when an explosion of its rocket injures a girl?
                      2. Alex_Tug
                        Alex_Tug 23 July 2016 23: 33
                        0
                        Well, and what is this self-destruction when an explosion of its rocket injures a girl?


                        If there is a piece of iron in heaven, then it will certainly fall to the earth. Or maybe someone's mind. If it does not pierce the skull, it’s good, but there will be a bump.
                      3. Simpsonian
                        Simpsonian 24 July 2016 03: 07
                        0
                        there is a sea nearby, little girls rarely swim in it
  2. Rus2012
    Rus2012 18 July 2016 08: 43
    +3
    Quote: dmi.pris
    Undermining the charge of warhead missiles of the air defense complex at a distance from the drone will certainly damage it.

    ... sometimes, indeed, it is not necessary to shoot "a cannon at the sparrows" - small UAVs, it is enough, for example, to turn them purely mechanically, especially with rotor-type copters ... You can also shoot down a cannon jet, the distance is up to hundreds of meters. Throw nets ... set fire to a jet of flamethrower ...

    They described the destruction of "alien drones" - by trained birds - falcons, goshawks ...
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 18 July 2016 09: 18
      +2
      Quote: Rus2012
      sometimes, really, it is not necessary to shoot "a cannon at the sparrows"

      ...to this topic -
      https://russian.rt.com/article/312558-v-somali-sbit-unikalnyi-bespilotnik-imitir
      ovavshii-pticu
      In the vicinity of Mogadishu in Somalia, a drone was shot down, which in its appearance was like a bird and could even make wing movements.

      According to Somali media, a downed drone could have been developed by the Somali National Security Agency (NISA). It is unclear how the drone was shot down and whether such drones were used before, reports The Verge.

      A downed drone not only has wings, it can even make flapping movements with them, like a real bird. At a sufficiently high altitude and with a cursory glance at the object, not everyone will immediately be able to understand that they are being monitored.
  • ICT
    ICT 18 July 2016 07: 14
    +1
    Quote: Operator
    for UAVs, a flapping wing and location (radar, optical) detection of reconnaissance drones will become impossible.



    I think the flapping wing has nothing to do with detection problems,
    the main problem at this stage is that now there are practically no units and equipment that can quickly deal with small-sized UAVs, (and the "birds" themselves are just there, and in case of cases they can create a problem)
    1. ICT
      ICT 18 July 2016 07: 20
      0
      Quote: Operator
      There is no reception against scrap -


      by the way, almost every saying has a continuation - "if there is no other scrap"
      1. Operator
        Operator 18 July 2016 09: 41
        0
        The only more or less scrap against UAVs is another fighter UAV.

        But here's the hitch - reconnaissance drones are compact, relatively simple and cheap. They can be stamped with thousands of pieces. Therefore, the simultaneous interception of, say, hundreds of reconnaissance drones is practically unattainable.

        But it is also possible to cover reconnaissance drones with the help of their fighter drones.
        1. Cresta999
          Cresta999 18 July 2016 14: 29
          -5
          One EW machine - and your entire hundred drones turn into many pieces of plastic.
          1. Operator
            Operator 18 July 2016 15: 09
            +3
            EW is now such a shamanic spell?

            EW only works against radio fuses, radars and omnidirectional radio channels. By definition, no UAV with narrowly targeted radio antennas has either one or the other or the third.
            1. Cresta999
              Cresta999 18 July 2016 18: 08
              0
              Yeah, you tell me that. I served 10 and did not know that it turned out I could only work against radio fuses, radars and DIRECTED radio channels!
            2. Uryukc
              Uryukc 18 July 2016 21: 01
              +1
              So what if "narrowly directed radio antennas", if the receiver is jammed with noise or with your own commands, the advantage of the UAV is that it will not be possible to intercept the signal outgoing from it (and even then only until it is turned where it should be). With small UAVs with radio control, the REB will cope, and with the larger ones that are at a height and use satellite communications, you can not regret the missiles.
              1. Operator
                Operator 18 July 2016 21: 07
                0
                A directional receiver (for example, with an antenna in the form of AFAR) can be clogged with noise from only one direction - from the side of the repeater.
                1. Cresta999
                  Cresta999 18 July 2016 23: 30
                  +3
                  Dear, you, apparently in general are not familiar with radio engineering at all. Sorry if offended. This is not a reproach. AFAR is a RADIATING antenna. Those. she herself emits a signal and herself receives it. An antenna working on reception does not need this property. In addition, even if the antenna is with a phrased antenna array, this will improve only two LO indicators. Weight and reliability. The construction of an antenna system in this way can still slightly improve positioning by reducing the tuning time and applying guidance algorithms. But this will in no way affect the selectivity of the receiver. If your signal is telemetry, then having put any other signal on your frequency we will clog your channel so that you cannot control and watch the picture. But if you overeat the morse, then the interference is not so terrible to you (at a distance). Telemetry is not transmitted at a distance, since it is used at high frequencies due to its wide band. And at high frequencies, the radio signal is not reflected from the ionosphere. Therefore, as soon as your UAV goes beyond the radio horizon, you will lose communication, since your control signal will penetrate the ionosphere and go into space. Absolute weapons do not exist. And electronic warfare, now as part of radio intelligence, is mandatory in any military conflict! Without modern systems of analysis and suppression in all ranges of radio frequencies, a war with a less civilized adversary could result in a severe defeat. There are such systems, not to say that in huge numbers, but there are. The question is more that their work needs to be learned to organize competently in one network, as it were. Elements of which could be replaced or reconfigured. I haven’t heard of this yet. And without this, the same UAV in one place can be strangled in a minute, and in another it will cause trouble.
                  1. Operator
                    Operator 18 July 2016 23: 50
                    0
                    The UAV network is an excellent solution, but this is not about that.

                    AFAR is nothing more than an antenna that works on transmission and, I assure you, on reception. It differs (among other things) by the sharp orientation of reception / transmission (the so-called needle-shaped).

                    The AFAR directs the direction of the computer, which scans it (the directivity) of the space in the solid angle to + - 60 degrees. In this case, the AFAR cloth remains motionless.

                    The computer, among other things, can constantly keep the focus of the AFAR on a given area of ​​space (for example, a repeater), regardless of the movement of the antenna carrier in space.

                    The computer can "cut out" from the field of view all noise and other signals that do not correspond to the coding of the useful signal. Therefore, there is only one way to drown out AFAR - to place the source of noise interference exactly on the line of the UAV-reconnaissance-UAV-repeater.

                    Given that both UAVs are in constant motion, this is an almost impossible task.
                    1. Cresta999
                      Cresta999 19 July 2016 10: 32
                      0
                      Read the post above. COMPUTER is AFTER the receiver !!!! I do not know how else to explain.
                    2. Operator
                      Operator 19 July 2016 13: 08
                      0
                      Read above - one AFAR antenna does not consist of one, but of hundreds and thousands of receivers.
                2. Monarchist
                  Monarchist 19 July 2016 10: 43
                  0
                  It is felt that the person, as they say, is "in the subject", and 8/10 of us are full of requisites or on the tops were grabbed and happy
                3. alexmach
                  alexmach 19 July 2016 22: 10
                  0
                  Such a question, but how realistic is it to detect a signal receiver from an UAV and cover it with artillery or an RZSO?
                  1. Alex_Tug
                    Alex_Tug 23 July 2016 00: 43
                    0
                    Such a question, but how realistic is it to detect a signal receiver from an UAV and cover it with artillery or an RZSO?


                    - in principle, real. The Iranians took control of the Amer drone and planted it at home. (There were only 3 such drones among amers)
                    - Another trick was to take control of the drone and broadcast its video stream to the enemy, i.e. drive the misinformation.

                    Now probably already encrypted. It is unlikely to take control, but you can detect it.
        2. sa-ag
          sa-ag 18 July 2016 15: 21
          +1
          Quote: Cresta999
          One EW Machine

          She is a good target for the same UAV
          1. Uryukc
            Uryukc 18 July 2016 21: 03
            +2
            There are no such UAVs with a full set of radio equipment and even with shock capabilities and autonomous control. And if it appears, they will not be small at all, and they will need to be shot down by missiles.
      2. Alex_Tug
        Alex_Tug 23 July 2016 00: 25
        0
        But it is also possible to cover reconnaissance drones with the help of their fighter drones.


        In this logic, shoot them with fighter drones. With relative cheapness, the fighter drone and the projectile itself. Weapons for them do not need to be developed.
  • Amurets
    Amurets 18 July 2016 08: 16
    +2
    Quote: TIT
    I think the flapping wing has nothing to do with detection problems,

    Why is it not connected? Previously, interference from TVs was driven away by a broom, but now the flapping wings will drive away the radar pulses.
  • Operator
    Operator 18 July 2016 09: 25
    -1
    Currently, radars distinguish the presence of propellers in UAVs (and, accordingly, distinguish them from birds) based on the Doppler effect.
    1. Cresta999
      Cresta999 18 July 2016 14: 32
      0
      The Doppler effect is the change in the frequency of the radio signal depending on the speed of the target. Therefore, the "propellers" on the UAV can in no way be helpers for the radar in this matter.
      1. Operator
        Operator 18 July 2016 15: 11
        +1
        Propellers consist of blades that rotate at a speed that is a multiple of the speed of the UAV, and at the same time reflect the probing radio signal with the corresponding Doppler frequency shift.
        1. minus
          minus 18 July 2016 17: 48
          +1
          Propellers are made of composite plastics, without metals. What is the reflection of radio waves?
          1. Operator
            Operator 18 July 2016 18: 28
            0
            The refractive indices of air and plastic are different, so there is a sufficient reflection of electromagnetic radiation from UAV propellers.
        2. Cresta999
          Cresta999 18 July 2016 18: 09
          +1
          This is only subject to the location of the irradiation signal perpendicular to the propeller! Are you really counting on this ?!
  • Bayonet
    Bayonet 18 July 2016 16: 08
    +1
    Quote: TIT
    I think the flapping wing has nothing to do with detection problems,

    Yes, how can I say, such a thing moving its wings, you’d rather take it for a bird than an UAV and look at it will not linger, purely intuitively.
  • Rus2012
    Rus2012 18 July 2016 08: 26
    +2
    Quote: Operator
    The RCS of a small-sized UAV is comparable to the RCS of a bird, which forces you to shoot "a cannon at the sparrows." It remains to introduce a flapping wing for UAVs and location (radar, optical) detection of reconnaissance drones will become impossible.


    This, of course, will create certain difficulties, but the introduction of antidrones, which can automatically control "not their own birds" in their sector, and upon detection - throw nets on them - and capture / shoot them down ...

    Author Ryabov Kirill, ignored such control and detection means as "monitoring the frequency spectrum and directions to sources" in the theater, the so-called. "passive radar". And such control is always carried out, and, as a rule, allows timely detection of "new" specific sources along with "permanent" ones. Even if the UAV flies without constant radio control, opto-electronic systems work: radio / laser altimeter, range finder, transmission channels, radio electronic equipment ...
    1. Operator
      Operator 18 July 2016 09: 33
      -1
      The reconnaissance drone communicates with the UAV repeater via a directional radio channel that is not detected from the ground. The drone’s flight altitude is determined by the barometric altimeter or by the operator’s picture. Avionics shielded with metal foil. The energy source is an electric accumulator that does not create a thermal trace.

      Protection against future anti-drones - maneuverability of reconnaissance drones.
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 18 July 2016 10: 02
        +3
        Quote: Operator
        The reconnaissance drone communicates with the UAV repeater via a directional radio channel that is not detected from the ground. The drone’s flight altitude is determined by the barometric altimeter or by the operator’s picture. Avionics shielded with metal foil.

        ... have you ever read or heard anything detailed about "passive location"?
        So, the data from 50-60 years - a highly sensitive millimeter-centimeter range radar receiver is capable of determining the rotation frequency of turbines in the internal circuit (tightly closed by the fuselage metal), such as Mig-21, Su-17 aircraft with dual-circuit engines ...
        And now there are already opto-radio electronic airborne radars (so-called radio-photonic radars), capable of "shining through" an aircraft through and through.
        1. Operator
          Operator 18 July 2016 10: 38
          -1
          That’s what the drone developers are switching to flapping wings in order to get away from the cyclically rotating propellers and, especially, turbines (whose edges reflect the sounding signal of the radar only from the air intakes of the aircraft).

          No optical, radar, or "radio-photonic" radiation can penetrate the metal foil. A radio-absorbing foil coating eliminates radiation reflection.

          The only type of electromagnetic radiation penetrating through the foil is x-rays (and then at point blank range).
      2. Cresta999
        Cresta999 18 July 2016 14: 40
        +2
        The radio channel is certainly directional, only in the first place, this directivity is far from ideal, since it is impossible to achieve the desired radiation pattern at the transmitting antenna (especially at a great distance) - and therefore, when flying UAVs at a low altitude, there is a chance of getting driven by control to ground-type receivers, (for example, the most directional means of communication - radio relay - are tapped on an equal footing with the others), and secondly - no one canceled the duty of equipment like A-50M. And besides, almost all modern UAVs use the GPS system. Therefore, they are able to work only with satellites. That with full-scale hostilities will be an impermissible luxury, which can only be remembered with nostalgia.
        1. Operator
          Operator 18 July 2016 15: 20
          0
          A narrowly directed radio signal from the reconnaissance UAV is always directed towards the UAV repeater located at an altitude of 12 km. When flying a UAV reconnaissance aircraft at a low altitude, the direction of reception and transmission of its antenna is directed upward, not downward.

          I don’t think that anyone in a combat situation would drive an ultra-expensive A-50 AWACS aircraft to the front line (the area of ​​the air defense system and enemy fighters) to intercept radio communications between cheap kopovye reconnaissance and unmanned aerial vehicles.
          1. Cresta999
            Cresta999 18 July 2016 18: 21
            0
            Do you have a channel that works only in one direction? From UAV to repeater? Or do you think that the signal, reaching the earth’s surface, for example, disappears in it?
            1. Operator
              Operator 18 July 2016 18: 30
              0
              And why do you need the coded control signal from the UAV repeater to the UAV reconnaissance - you still can’t replace it (even if you decode it), since the antenna of the UAV reconnaissance is always oriented in the direction of the UAV repeater.
              1. Cresta999
                Cresta999 18 July 2016 18: 41
                +2
                Why do you need to decode something ?! It is enough to interfere. After all, the control signal is coming to the UAV!
                1. Operator
                  Operator 18 July 2016 20: 18
                  0
                  UAV reconnaissance takes into account the direction from which the control signal comes from the UAV repeater.

                  Interferences coming from other directions are ignored.
                  1. Uryukc
                    Uryukc 18 July 2016 21: 30
                    0
                    Well then, to shoot down the uber drone and the thing is with the end.
                  2. Cresta999
                    Cresta999 18 July 2016 23: 11
                    0
                    The receiver cannot take into account the direction of the incoming RADIO SIGNAL in any way !!! It's like you would say: "the dam only allows water flowing from a clean river to pass through itself!" Doesn't let the dirty one pass even if it flows with great pressure?
                    1. Operator
                      Operator 18 July 2016 23: 56
                      0
                      Of course, a radio receiver and, especially, its antenna, cannot take anything into account by definition, including determining the direction to the radio transmitter.

                      For them, this is done by a computer that processes the phases of the radio signal, independently received by several hundred transmitting and receiving AFAR modules.
                    2. Cresta999
                      Cresta999 19 July 2016 10: 33
                      0
                      Handles PHASES? :) How old are you?
                    3. Operator
                      Operator 19 July 2016 13: 10
                      0
                      Learn AFAR, then you can continue.
  • Uryukc
    Uryukc 18 July 2016 21: 18
    +1
    To the operator

    And what will prevent the UAV from detecting by radar and knocking it off fuck?

    "electric accumulator that does not create a thermal footprint"

    ... Batteries and electric motors heat up during operation - as it were.
    1. Operator
      Operator 19 July 2016 00: 00
      -1
      It is possible to detect, it is more difficult to detect from birds, it is impossible to shoot down (the operational overload of a highly maneuverable UAV reconnaissance exceeds the operational overload of an anti-aircraft missile).
      1. Uryukc
        Uryukc 19 July 2016 00: 07
        +2
        Something you turned down with overloads - it will always be easier to make an over-maneuverable missile than an over-maneuverable UAV; all the more so on a rocket now they put a contactless fuse and an oriented warhead. In developed countries, including the RF, hypersonic air-to-air missiles are being developed.

        How are you going to combine super maneuverability with an "electric accumulator that does not create a thermal footprint."

        You either stole in the trash, or troll us here.
        Shorter links to the studio.
  • DarkMatter
    DarkMatter 18 July 2016 09: 08
    +7
    I remembered something
    1. Aqela
      Aqela 18 July 2016 11: 12
      +1
      Pancake! And there is absolutely nothing to object to this! After all, he clearly shot down a rocket!
      There is only one thing: I am afraid that the cost of an airplane takeoff and an air-to-air missile may significantly exceed the price of a "drone" (of course, this does not apply to heavy UAVs such as MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1 Predator). In view of the fact that the economic component of warfare is an important thing, the question of a light interceptor will surely arise. These can be helicopters or light-engine piston aircraft, because to destroy small UAVs, the power of a machine gun of a normal caliber or even a salvo of shot is quite enough. Aviation and not only machine guns are not new things, making a "shot machine gun" with a range of about 100 m is a real thing. Further, the question will arise about air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles of small caliber and the use of shells with remote detonation, similar to the US anti-aircraft systems even during WWII. I think that now such shrapnel shells can be made for 30-mm, and 57-mm will also be much more powerful ...
      So the question is, it seems to me, not in the destruction of UAVs, but in their quick and high-quality detection and guidance of interceptors. In this regard, the same low-power laser systems will be useful 1) to damage optical systems, 2) to illuminate "drones" for the purpose of accurately targeting interceptors or light guided missiles.
      Something like this ... In general, the article "+"
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 18 July 2016 13: 13
        +1
        Quote: Aqela
        There is only one thing: I am afraid that the cost of an airplane takeoff and an air-to-air missile may significantly exceed the price of a "drone" (of course, this does not apply to heavy UAVs such as MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1 Predator). In view of the fact that the economic component of warfare is an important thing, the question of a light interceptor will surely arise.

        Not everything is measured in money. The price of information in money cannot be determined. In Vietnam, an American drone recorded the frequencies of the radio channel on the fuse of 1D missiles; 11D S-75 air defense systems and the Americans interfered with the radio fuse. The missiles stopped exploding. This is a quote from the book "How It Was. The War in Vietnam." << On this day, a large group of American planes, lined up for a parade, made another raid on the outskirts of Hanoi. As soon as they entered the zone of destruction of our divisions, fire was opened. A total of 29 missiles were fired, 11 of them fell: the guidance stations did not capture them, since for the first time the Americans massively used their novelty - interference through the radio imaging channel. The channel was completely blocked, and as a result, the SNP "went blind": they could not see their missiles, and the second radio control channel could not control the missile flight without their coordinates >> And how can we estimate these losses in money?
      2. Uryukc
        Uryukc 18 July 2016 21: 46
        0
        That's why everyone decided that drones are cheap?

        Orbiter - $ 600 if you believe http://bespilotie.ru/orbiter-000/

        And after all, it is not necessary to knock it down, you can just clog the control signal with noise. Yes, and you can’t regret the needle, given how much damage this kid can do.
        1. MACCABI-TLV
          MACCABI-TLV 18 July 2016 22: 29
          -1
          Quote: Uryukc
          . Yes, and you can’t regret the needle, given how much damage this kid can do.

          she will not be pointed at him, and she will not get him.
          Quote: Uryukc
          And after all, it is not necessary to knock it down, you can just clog the control signal with noise

          you can even easier, just shout the magic word "Autobaza" towards the drone ... wink
          1. Uryukc
            Uryukc 18 July 2016 23: 43
            0
            1. The pussy-willow will cope, well, of course, they’ve got stuck at the maximum height, but the drone will see what the hell he sees from a height of 5500 m.

            2. Magic doesn’t work like that: the operator makes magic passes over the console, after which the product for 600000 bucks loses control, and if the Autobase takes part in this action, the product sits well or falls next to the positions of the Russian army)
            I do not understand your skepticism, do you think the RF EW wax is cardboard?
            1. MACCABI-TLV
              MACCABI-TLV 19 July 2016 12: 05
              0
              Quote: Uryukc
              1. The pussy-willow will cope, well, of course, they’ve got stuck at the maximum height, but the drone will see what the hell he sees from a height of 5500 m.

              is willow already? well let there be a willow.
              The willow in the troops is not even a wagon, but a small cart, and it will not capture the same.
              Orbiter-2 has an electric motor, all the heat that it generates at an altitude of 4 km is not enough to capture the GOS.
              Quote: Uryukc
              but the drone hell that he sees from a height of 5500 m.

              That is, spy satellites are all bullshit? You can see it from space, but you can’t see it from the UAV? What can I say ... well done.
              Quote: Uryukc
              I do not understand your skepticism, do you think the RF EW wax is cardboard?

              I am no longer at that age to unconditionally believe in "Santa Claus"!
              1. Uryukc
                Uryukc 19 July 2016 15: 43
                0
                1. It is imperative for you to explain in all the details (sighs heavily) - okay:
                The needle (if the GOS captures) will bring down at low altitudes; Willow - is likely to cope at low altitudes, and it was created with the expectation of fighting UAVs. These complexes, while a small cart, and then there will be a wagon. If the above is not present or is inefficient, then the tactical air defense systems will come into play, changing positions after launches. Our missiles are still much cheaper than drones.

                2. Is it really necessary to explain to you at "your age" that you cannot fit equipment for a satellite or even a bomber into a payload of 1,5 kg, in addition, the maximum height of the UAV is indicated without a payload, that is, in practice, the drone is unlikely to fly on high altitude, although it can.

                3. You don’t believe in Santa Claus anymore, but for some reason you believe in invulnerable drones. So you are only fools to listen to in the Russian Federation, they adopt some kind of incomprehensible piece of iron that you don’t understand the work of, from which apparently you conclude that they are useless. You would see yourself from the side, with your arrogance.
                1. MACCABI-TLV
                  MACCABI-TLV 19 July 2016 22: 44
                  -1
                  Quote: Uryukc
                  2. Is it really necessary to explain to you at "your age" that you cannot fit equipment for a satellite or even a bomber into a payload of 1,5 kg, in addition, the maximum height of the UAV is indicated without a payload, that is, in practice, the drone is unlikely to fly on high altitude, although it can.

                2. MACCABI-TLV
                  MACCABI-TLV 20 July 2016 00: 29
                  -1
                  Quote: Uryukc
                  You must explain in all the details (sighs heavily) - okay:

                  yes especially how GOS Needles or Willow will capture an electric motor. (small one)
                  Quote: Uryukc
                  If the above is not present or is inefficient, then the tactical air defense systems will come into play, changing positions after launches. Our missiles are still much cheaper than drones.

                  Yeah, of course, here 2 Patriots PAC2, and missiles air-to-air could not.

                  Quote: Uryukc
                  2. Is it really necessary to explain to you at "your age" that you cannot fit equipment for a satellite or even a bomber into a payload of 1,5 kg, in addition, the maximum height of the UAV is indicated without a payload, that is, in practice, the drone is unlikely to fly on high altitude, although it can.

                  I brought you a video. For the sake of the mat, look. And how do you get the confidence that if you can’t make good equipment not bulky, then you can’t do it anywhere?
                  Quote: Uryukc
                  3. You don’t believe in Santa Claus anymore, but for some reason you believe in invulnerable drones.

                  there are no invulnerable things in the world (except human stupidity), but today, to shoot down UAVs is not a trivial task.
                  Quote: Uryukc
                  To listen to you like that in the Russian Federation are some fools,

                  Where did I say that? (although everyone knows about the 2nd eternal Russian troubles) smile
                  Quote: Uryukc
                  You would see yourself from the side, with your arrogance.

                  let’s talk on the topic, because, I don’t care what impression I personally make on you.
                  PS In May 2012, the Ministry of Defense of Finland signed a contract for the supply of 45 Orbiter unmanned systems worth about $ 31 million, which include 180 Orbiter II drones [17].
                  Can you divide 31 million by 180? how much came out? wink
                  1. alexmach
                    alexmach 20 July 2016 01: 41
                    +2
                    Indeed, the goal is difficult for the GOS. A shell with a ground-based radar, radio command guidance and a relatively inexpensive missile is more likely to come in handy.
                  2. Uryukc
                    Uryukc 20 July 2016 01: 50
                    0
                    According to your video, the UAV dangled at an altitude of less than 200 meters, which is quite possible for MANPADS.

                    Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                    how GOS Needles or Willow will capture an electric motor


                    If electric, then the needle certainly will not cope. On a willow, a sensitive, high-resolution GSN, whether or not to argue, it does not make sense because there is no information on the application and design, the cat did not cry about the performance characteristics, it is encouraging that this is a young complex that was developed including for fighting UAVs. The electric motor and batteries are also heated, and efficient ones are heated even more.

                    Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                    knock down UAVs is not a trivial task.

                    And I don't argue, I even agree that Orbiter and other Israeli drones are great. But the Air Defense Forces and the RF REB are also "nontrivial".

                    Quote: Uryukc
                    Orbit - $ 600 if you believe //bespilotie.ru/orbiter-2/


                    Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                    in May 2012 The Finnish Ministry of Defense signed a contract for the supply of 45 Orbiter unmanned systems worth about $ 31 million, which includes 180 drones Orbiter ii


                    I think the bold text will help you understand what I'm hinting at, plus the discount for a large contract.

                    Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                    because, I don’t care what impression I personally make on you.


                    I think you and others impress Svidomo from Israel, if you are not indifferent (I do not set myself the task of insulting).

                    Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                    And how do you get the confidence that if you can’t make good equipment bulky, then they can’t do it anywhere?


                    I have no such confidence
                    A counter-question, how do you get confidence that we cannot make such equipment?
                    "Persona (KA)" - 750 km above the ground, a resolution of 30 cm, better not yet. wink
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                    2. Uryukc
                      Uryukc 20 July 2016 20: 53
                      0
                      Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                      the feeling that you are not very confident in the subject of the dispute


                      Quote: Uryukc
                      Needle, (if GOS captures) will hit at low altitudes; Willow - probably can cope at low altitudes


                      You have the right feeling, if I were sure, I would not print the highlighted words. I will decide when all the causes of doubt disappear. Just as long as I see no reason to be sure that Verba will not cope, if you have not shot down a drone, it does not mean that no one can.

                      Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                      I think you just mixed up the price of 1 complex and 1 UAV.


                      Quote: Uryukc
                      Orbiter - $ 600 if you believe //bespilotie.ru/orbiter-000/


                      And I think that everything is clearly written in the first post.

                      By satellites

                      Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                      750 km high [3].) 7 tons ... Karl.


                      Yes, your satellite is an order of magnitude lighter, but it also has an order of magnitude smaller characteristics (which does not make it bad): the altitude of the orbit is 750 versus 630-311, the resolution is 70 versus 30 cm. Need to explain that the farther the more difficult to get a clear image? ... Karl
                      From the above, it should be clear that the "Person" is still compact (KN-11 13 tons for comparison). Let's close the topic of satellites on this, so as not to "think along the tree".

                      By MIC

                      The person KA is the development of the 2000s, which refutes your thesis about import substitution.
                      The only state in the world that possessed a developed and at the same time self-sufficient military-industrial complex was the USSR, which I am proud of as born in the USSR.
                      Therefore, poking the Russian Federation with the fact that we are importing, is either a rotten argument.
                      A new homeland, no reason to shit Russia.
                    3. MACCABI-TLV
                      MACCABI-TLV 21 July 2016 11: 09
                      0
                      Quote: Uryukc
                      You have the right feeling, if I were sure, I would not print the highlighted words. I will decide when all the causes of doubt disappear.

                      then let's come to a certain denominator. My quote that UAVs are difficult to bring down, even by modern means, is correct.
                      Quote: Uryukc
                      And I think that everything is clearly written in the first post.

                      Once again: (and carefully)
                      Serbia - in 2008, 10 Orbiter were purchased with a total value of 700 thousand dollars
                      Finland - In May 2012, the Ministry of Defense of Finland signed a contract for the supply of 45 Orbiter unmanned systems worth about $ 31 million, which include 180 Orbiter drones.
                      that the FSB of Russia is considering the purchase of at least five Orbiter UAVs, the cost of which is estimated at $ 3 million.
                      Ie the price in the 700kk declared by you (in the first post) does not correspond to reality. So to operate with a figure of $ 700000 apiece, this is a little to tell the truth.

                      Quote: Uryukc
                      Yes, your satellite is an order of magnitude lighter, but it also has an order of magnitude smaller characteristics (which does not make it bad): the altitude of the orbit is 750 versus 630-311, the resolution is 70 versus 30 cm. Need to explain that the farther the more difficult to get a clear image? .

                      not 70, but from half a meter to 70 (half a meter was always 50). Do you have something with the value "an order of magnitude" wrong. How many orders are 7000 kg versus 300 kg? 750 km versus 630? 50cm versus 30?
                      Quote: Uryukc
                      Let's close the topic of satellites on this, so as not to "think along the tree".

                      Once you agree that some 1.5 kg of payload can be crammed as much as others have 100 kg smile
                      Quote: Uryukc
                      The person KA is the development of the 2000s, which refutes your thesis about import substitution.

                      in no way, excuse me. Have you tried to build the ZALA family on your own mat-tech base (which was introduced in 2008) and in 2010 wanted to buy Orbiter what is suddenly asked?
                      Quote: Uryukc
                      The only state in the world that possessed a developed and at the same time self-sufficient military-industrial complex was the USSR, which I am proud of as born in the USSR.
                      Therefore, poking the Russian Federation with the fact that we are importing, is either a rotten argument.

                      This flame is not at all interesting to me besides the fact that I did not quite understand where to poke the RF, and why is the rotten argument rotten? In the worst nightmare, I can’t admit that the opportunity to buy a high-quality finished product (import it) is a disaster and national humiliation.
                      Quote: Uryukc
                      A new homeland, no reason to shit Russia.
                      Well, please show me the link to pouring my shit on Russia. (Don’t imagine, I’ll finally open your blacklist from your nickname)
                    4. Uryukc
                      Uryukc 21 July 2016 20: 22
                      0
                      Comments have already grown into mini articles, spinning in 2 parts

                      Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                      then let's come to a certain denominator


                      Quote: Uryukc
                      Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                      knock down UAVs is not a trivial task.
                      I don’t argue ... But the Air Defense Forces and the REB of the Russian Federation are also "non-trivial".


                      here is the denominator.

                      Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                      there is no clear idea how to deal with them


                      My view
                      The main drawback of modern UAVs is not their autonomy, so the successful suppression of communication lines deprives them of tactical value. Therefore, REB is the first candidate for fighting drones, primarily radio-controlled ones, all the more so as it is also the most economical method of fighting. If for drone UAVs there is a way out of the situation in the form of AI, then this will not help scouts.
                      Of course, you shouldn't count on one REB, the developers of MANPADS and tactical air defense systems are improving their products, including for the fight against drones, I am sure their efforts will not be in vain. But the development of specialized weapons is a waste, the "opportunity costs" are too high.
                      Suppressing communications with strategic drones operating at altitude, controlled via satellite, is orders of magnitude more difficult, but their high cost and significance justify the use of not only tactical, but also operational tactical air defense. Stealth technologies that protect such UAVs can quite successfully withstand - developing radar technologies.
                    5. alexmach
                      alexmach 21 July 2016 22: 21
                      0
                      If for drone UAVs there is a way out of the situation in the form of AI, then this will not help scouts.


                      Well, why on earth? why can't a scout be autonomous? Imagine - it flies along a pre-entered route or area with certain permissible deviations, it transfers data only when it finds something interesting. In small pieces, tuning the frequency. For example, maybe just transfer coordinates for purposes suitable in his opinion for artillery. Or maybe information about the revealed by him the means of this same electronic warfare ...
                    6. MACCABI-TLV
                      MACCABI-TLV 22 July 2016 21: 44
                      +1
                      Quote: alexmach
                      Well, why on earth? why can't a scout be autonomous?

                      They are all autonomous today, with a break in the communication channel (for the simplest ones), the UAV returns to the point of departure on its own.
                      Quote: alexmach
                      It only transfers data when it finds something interesting. In small pieces, tuning the frequency.

                      Therefore, even the smallest devices are trying to stick satellite communications. And here the dimension of equipment comes into play.
                3. Uryukc
                  Uryukc 21 July 2016 20: 22
                  0
                  Comments have already grown into mini-articles, will have to be divided into 2 parts

                  Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                  then let's come to a certain denominator


                  Quote: Uryukc
                  Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                  knock down UAVs is not a trivial task.
                  I don’t argue ... But the Air Defense Forces and the REB of the Russian Federation are also "non-trivial".


                  here is the denominator.

                  Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                  there is no clear idea how to deal with them


                  My view
                  The main drawback of modern UAVs is not their autonomy, so the successful suppression of communication lines deprives them of tactical value. Therefore, REB is the first candidate for fighting drones, primarily radio-controlled ones, all the more so as it is also the most economical method of fighting. If for drone UAVs there is a way out of the situation in the form of AI, then this will not help scouts.
                  Of course, you shouldn't count on one REB, the developers of MANPADS and tactical air defense systems are improving their products, including for the fight against drones, I am sure their efforts will not be in vain. But the development of specialized weapons is a waste, the "opportunity costs" are too high.
                  Suppressing communications with strategic drones operating at altitude, controlled via satellite, is orders of magnitude more difficult, but their high cost and significance justify the use of not only tactical, but also operational tactical air defense. Stealth technologies that protect such UAVs can quite successfully withstand - developing radar technologies.

                  Quote: MACCABI-TLV
                  Ie the price in the 700kk declared by you (in the first post) does not correspond to reality.


                  1. It is declared 600 000 $ (and you still call me to attentiveness!);
                  2. you are breaking through the open door again, in two posts I hinted that I was referring to bespilotie.ru and apparently this resource let me down.

                  Continued below.
            2. Uryukc
              Uryukc 20 July 2016 21: 45
              0
              Quote: Uryukc
              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              Yeah, of course, here 2 Patriots PAC2, and missiles air-to-air could not.


              Patriots are no match for the latest modifications of our complexes.


              Here's another - your opinion is interesting.
            3. MACCABI-TLV
              MACCABI-TLV 21 July 2016 11: 14
              0
              Quote: Uryukc
              Patriots are no match for the latest modifications of our complexes.

              so we have Patriots from 91 years old (1 Iraqi) with MIM-104A missiles. To compare them with modern complexes is how to compare the t-34 with the t-90. The patriot had the last update in 1999. This is not a valid question and comparison.
              I still insist that there is no collected, proven, and tested tactics for fighting UAVs. And while there is no clear idea of ​​how to fight them, UAVs are not an easy target.
            4. Uryukc
              Uryukc 21 July 2016 20: 31
              0
              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              The person KA is the development of the 2000s, which refutes your thesis about import substitution.
              in no way, excuse me. Have you tried to build the ZALA family on your own mat-tech base (which was introduced in 2008) and in 2010 wanted to buy Orbiter what is suddenly asked?


              The satellite example shows that we are also able to create compact reconnaissance equipment (7 tons for such a device is very good), and not that our military-industrial complex is self-sufficient and we do not need to be imported.
              And even more so, I did not say that drones and satellites are the same thing.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              In the worst nightmare, I can’t admit that the opportunity to buy a high-quality finished product (import it) is a disaster and national humiliation.


              "Flame" just should have suggested this idea to you. So that rotten argument is rotten.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              a link to pouring my shit on Russia


              OK

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              just shout the magic word "Autobaza" in the direction of the drone .....

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              Quote: Uryukc
              I do not understand your skepticism, according to your wax EW RF cardboard?
              I am no longer at that age to unconditionally believe in "Santa Claus"!

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              you can't make good equipment not bulky

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              before that you yuzali thenwhat did you agree to sell


              "Agreed to sell", that means how. Are the memory gaps restored?

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              don’t imagine, I’ll finally open your blacklist from your nickname


              ... And what does it mean, you will hate me every time you read the "black list" or send the mossad to kill me? In any case, I can’t answer you in return.
              I did not set out to humiliate you, but merely teased and criticized.
            5. MACCABI-TLV
              MACCABI-TLV 22 July 2016 23: 35
              0
              Quote: Uryukc
              here is the denominator.

              So far, no electronic warfare, no air defense, nothing to brag about in the fight against UAVs.
              http://izvestia.ru/news/536181
              http://vognebroda.net/pvo-izrailya-ne-smogli-sbit-zaletevshiy-iz-sirii-bespilotn
              ik
              isolated cases of UAV destruction by fighters do not count.
              Quote: Uryukc
              Therefore, REB is the first candidate for fighting drones, primarily radio-controlled ones, all the more so as it is also the most economical method of fighting.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              Quote: alexmach
              Well, why on earth? why can't a scout be autonomous?
              They are all autonomous today, with a break in the communication channel (for the simplest ones), the UAV returns to the point of departure on its own.

              no one has yet been able to intercept the control channel (they could have wedged into a real-time broadcast in the past when the image was not encrypted as in the cases of the Sh-13 tragedy in Israel)
              Quote: Uryukc
              The satellite example shows that we are also able to create compact reconnaissance equipment (7 tons for such a device is very good), and not that our military-industrial complex is self-sufficient and we do not need to be imported.

              Are you trying to troll me like that? 300 kg is compact, and 7+ tons is a hefty fool. Which once again confirms that you cannot create small-sized equipment with high resolution (for a number of reasons), that's why this is.
              http://10minut.info/2016/04/izrail-razryvaet-sotrudnichestvo-s-rossiejj-po-bespi
              lotnikam /
              or, well, this is a wonderful confirmation of my words.
              http://www.rbc.ru/politics/21/07/2016/579107469a7947f8a7053e1e?google_editors_pi
              cks = true

              Quote: Uryukc
              "Flame" just should have suggested this idea to you. So that rotten argument is rotten.

              This is already obvious trolling, and not at all good.
            6. MACCABI-TLV
              MACCABI-TLV 22 July 2016 23: 37
              0
              Quote: Uryukc

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              just shout the magic word "Autobaza" in the direction of the drone .....
              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              Quote: Uryukc
              I do not understand your skepticism, do you think the RF EW wax is cardboard?
              I am no longer at that age to unconditionally believe in "Santa Claus"!
              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              you cannot make good equipment not bulky
              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              before that you used what you agreed to sell

              well, where is the muddling of Russia? I just want to ask "you .. damn it in your mind" (c) You troll very thickly, the desire to discuss with you decreases every second.
              Quote: Uryukc
              "Agreed to sell", that means how. Are the memory gaps restored?

              Exactly so, it is, no matter how hard it is for you to live. They are selling to Russia (especially from us) not what she wants (and she wanted a heavy DRON, electro-optical reconnaissance satellites, and military communications), but what they are ready to sell to her, namely, the development of 15-20 years ago. fears of technology transfer to hostile structures (as in the case of the transfer of cornets and vampires to Lebanese Hezbollah in 2006), and due to the foreign policy directions of the Russian Federation.
              http://ria.ru/arms/20131203/981434962.html
              http://www.km.ru/v-rossii/2013/04/10/ministerstvo-oborony-rf/708145-rossiya-kupi
              tu-izrailya-tekhnologii-dlya-sputnik
              http://9tv.co.il/news/2015/11/09/216675.html

              Quote: Uryukc
              .. And what does it mean, you will hate me every time you read the "black list" or send the mossad to kill me?

              Excuse me, how old are you?
              Quote: Uryukc
              I did not set out to humiliate you, but merely teased and criticized.

              tingling? Is that what you call your trolling? Humiliated? Do you understand that you are on the Internet? You still beat me virtually .... why only, I spent my time on you.
            7. Uryukc
              Uryukc 23 July 2016 05: 30
              0
              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              So far, no electronic warfare, no air defense, nothing to brag about in the fight against UAVs.
              //izvestia.ru/news/536181
              //vognebroda.net/pvo-izrailya-ne-smogli-sbit-zaletevshiy-iz-sirii-bespilotn
              ik
              isolated cases of UAV destruction by fighters do not count.


              1. It is not clear why the destruction of air-to-air missiles does not count, in our country the earth-to-air is no worse, laser guidance also happens at ground-based complexes.

              2. I am aware of the failure in Ashuluk, but this is GPS, I already wrote for satellite communications. in addition, there is no guarantee that this protocol can still not be suppressed. Do I really need you to prove the vulnerability of the radio channel, fire.
              The second link does not work.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              nobody has yet been able to intercept the control channel


              1.http: //topwar.ru/41496-krymchane-perehvatili-amerikanskiy-udarnyy-bespilotnik.ht
              ml

              2.http: //inosmi.ru/asia/20111215/180397502.html

              3. It is not necessary to intercept it as an alternative to suppression. AND not all UAVs are as smart as you paint, although of course you need to prepare for the worst.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              300 kg is compact, and 7+ tons is a hefty fool.


              I repeat to you the second time the characteristics are not equivalent therefore the comparison is not correct.
              Quote: Uryukc
              KN-11 13 tons for comparison

              Here is a more or less correct comparison.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              Well, where is the mud pouring on Russia?

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              This is already obvious trolling, and not at all good.


              You do not understand me, just as I do you, it’s neither bad nor good, it’s just that.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              Exactly so


              Well it was informative, did not know, mistook it for a sarcastic tone.
              It’s hard for me to understand the Israeli position, well, let's not delve into this.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              Excuse me, how old are you?

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              Do you understand that you are on the Internet?


              25 years before retirement. does it change anything?
              No, I thought it was a post office in Russia.)

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              tingling? Is that what you call your trolling? Humiliated? You still beat me virtually ....


              Judging by how you are being bombed, my remarks were not superfluous.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              why only, I spent my time on you.


              I think in order to prove my position, however, I do not impose.
            8. MACCABI-TLV
              MACCABI-TLV 23 July 2016 14: 16
              0
              Quote: Uryukc
              1. It is not clear why the destruction of air-to-air missiles does not count, in our country the earth-to-air is no worse, laser guidance also happens at ground-based complexes.

              because you don’t have enough fighters and missiles to them, and even more don’t have enough money to chase light tactical UAVs.
              with their EPR you can try to direct the earth-air, as it turns out tell! The only thing I can admit is guidance over the optical channel, although I'm not sure.
              Quote: Uryukc
              Do I really need you to prove the vulnerability of the radio channel, fire.

              Yes, it’s necessary, because the break of the radio channel is cases that still go beyond the rules.
              Quote: Uryukc
              1. //topwar.ru/41496-krymchane-perehvatili-amerikanskiy-udarnyy-bespilotnik.ht
              ml
              2. //inosmi.ru/asia/20111215/180397502.html

              "Another crucified boy in Sloviansk." If you wish, I will explain to you in a personal why I do not believe.
              Quote: Uryukc
              3. It is not necessary to intercept it as an alternative to suppression. And not all UAVs are as smart as you paint, although of course you need to prepare for the worst.

              break the communication channel, the UAV will fly to the base. The Germans in Afghanistan lost 2 Girona, they simply defeated them, one for that reason the second in terms of people. The Taliban did not ascribe to them their interception, but honestly said ... they themselves fell to us.
            9. Uryukc
              Uryukc 23 July 2016 16: 47
              0
              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              The Russian Federation tried to buy 300 kg satellites from us for the same purposes, doesn’t it mean anything to you?


              The source you brought tells me that the military wants to receive satellite imagery in real time (this is not possible on a Spacecraft Person because of heliosynchronous orbit, etc.), as well as the fact that they are interested in your technology. A magnifying glass and a microscope also serve the same purpose (exaggerate). I affirm that our satellite is relatively compact for its characteristics, although it seems to be no longer a champion, and I will not return to this anymore.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              with unfounded charges.


              The charges are well-founded but not understood.
              In Russia they can do anything and any size, they just need time and political will. Everyone who is not ready for us to sell something, let them do without our money, their problems.
              Mockery of our armed forces (REB), I think for "shit pouring", and if to generalize, then from your posts comes through Israeli arrogance.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              For the concept, you need to at least visit the country before drawing conclusions.


              You set high requirements, I draw conclusions on what I can see from Russia:
              First of all, it is Russophobia in the Israeli media;
              a strange position in relation to the Palestinians - "we here retreated for 2000 thousand years, well, in general, this is our land" and these people still reproach us with Crimea;
              repatriates in a mentoring tone arguing that in Russia only cabbage soup can eat bread, and you have a technological singularity there.
              Which, however, does not stop me from admiring Israeli technology and the organization of law enforcement agencies, the most delicious figs I ate were grown in the Israeli desert.
              And in general, I have nothing against Israel, Israelis and Jews. And such friction is commonplace.

              Quote: MACCABI-TLV
              "Another crucified boy in Sloviansk"


              "SlAvyansk"
              Yes, you (not personally you - in the broad sense) have already hesitated with this boy. I myself saw how it was:
              on channel 1 they started a story where this crazy thing was catching a glimpse and it didn’t follow from this story that channel 1 supported it, right away our people started attacking channel 1 that they say filter what you show.
              Everyone who is aware of this incident will tell you for sure that this is not "propaganda", it is a "quote" or "a jamb". There is no need to compare our propaganda with Ukrainian TV, and your media are also good, talking about the Russian threat and the insidious Putin.
          2. MACCABI-TLV
            MACCABI-TLV 23 July 2016 14: 32
            +1
            Quote: Uryukc
            I repeat to you the second time the characteristics are not equivalent therefore the comparison is not correct.

            I don’t know how many times I’m telling you, the Russian Federation tried to buy 300 kg satellites from us for the same purposes, doesn’t it mean anything to you?
            //www.km.ru/v-rossii/2013/04/10/ministerstvo-oborony-rf/708145-rossiya-kupi
            tu-izrailya-tekhnologii-dlya-sputnik (again).
            Quote: Uryukc
            Well it was informative, did not know, mistook it for a sarcastic tone.

            I, unlike you, do not tease, do not troll, and do not suffer from any phobias in relation to people, races, or countries. I have not been noticed in Russophobia, and I’m connected with the Russian Federation much more than you can imagine. So tie with unfounded accusations.
            Quote: Uryukc
            It’s hard for me to understand the Israeli position, well, let's not delve into this.

            For the concept, you need to at least visit the country before drawing conclusions.
            Quote: Uryukc
            25 years before retirement. does it change anything?
            No, I thought it was a post office in Russia.)

            then I don’t think it’s normal to read like that in an adult ...
            Quote: Uryukc
            Judging by how you are being bombed, my remarks were not superfluous.
          3. Uryukc
            Uryukc 23 July 2016 16: 42
            0
            Quote: MACCABI-TLV
            The Russian Federation tried to buy 300 kg satellites from us for the same purposes, doesn’t it mean anything to you?


            The source you brought tells me that the military wants to receive satellite imagery in real time (this is not possible on a Spacecraft Person because of heliosynchronous orbit), as well as the fact that they are interested in your technology. A magnifying glass and a microscope also serve the same purpose (exaggerate). I affirm that our satellite is relatively compact for its characteristics, although it seems to be no longer a champion, and I will not return to this anymore.

            Quote: MACCABI-TLV
            with unfounded charges.


            The charges are well-founded but not understood.
            In Russia they can do anything and any size, they just need time and political will. Everyone who is not ready for us to sell something, let them do without our money, their problems.
            Mockery of our armed forces (REB), I think for "shit pouring", and if to generalize, then from your posts comes through Israeli arrogance.

            Quote: MACCABI-TLV
            For the concept, you need to at least visit the country before drawing conclusions.


            You set high requirements, I draw conclusions on what I can see from Russia:
            First of all, they are Russophobic Israeli media;
            a strange position in relation to the Palestinians - "we here retreated for 2000 thousand years, well, in general, this is our land" and these people still reproach us with Crimea;
            repatriates in a mentoring tone arguing that in Russia only cabbage soup can eat bread, and you have a technological singularity there.
            Which, however, does not stop me from admiring Israeli technology and the organization of law enforcement agencies, the most delicious figs I ate were grown in the Israeli desert.
            And in general, I have nothing against Israel, Israelis and Jews. And such friction is commonplace.
          4. Uryukc
            Uryukc 23 July 2016 17: 16
            0
            Quote: MACCABI-TLV
            "Another crucified boy in Sloviansk"


            "SlAvyansk"
            Yes, you (not personally you - in the broad sense) already hesitated with this boy, I myself saw how it was:
            on channel 1 we started a story where this crazy thing was catching a glimpse and it didn’t follow from this story that channel 1 supported it, right away our people started attacking channel 1, that they say filter what you show.
            Everyone who is aware of this incident will tell you for sure that this is not "propaganda", this is a "quote" or "jamb". There is no need to compare our propaganda with Ukrainian TV, and your media are also good, talking about the Russian threat and the insidious Putin.
          5. MACCABI-TLV
            MACCABI-TLV 23 July 2016 19: 53
            0
            Quote: Uryukc
            No need to compare our propaganda with ukro-TV

            she is no better.
            Quote: Uryukc
            and your media are good, talking about the Russian threat and the insidious Putin.

            Once again, you can’t cite our media as an example, since you don’t own a state language. Everything else is not our media.
            I don’t need to tell you about the Russian media (Ophiosis), I can tell you myself. My opinion is that they are not objective from the word at all.
        2. MACCABI-TLV
          MACCABI-TLV 23 July 2016 19: 36
          0
          Quote: Uryukc
          In Russia they can do anything and any size, they just need time and political will. Everyone who is not ready for us to sell something, let them do without our money, their problems.
          Mockery of our armed forces (REB), I think for "shit pouring", and if to generalize, then from your posts comes through Israeli arrogance.

          In Russia, there are plenty of paradoxes in general, they can send a person into space, and they cannot pave the way to the HOA for 7 years, etc., etc. What political will is needed to create a satellite that is needed yesterday is the state priority of national security.
          I have already explained the position on sales of military technology in the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation has discredited itself by a number of actions, therefore money is not a priority here.
          watering EW shit ... EW hasn’t proved anything yet, in general, it’s not there, but hasn’t done anything yet. Or do you have evidence that Tamogafki dropped the EW, or the Israeli Air Force blinded the same EW, attacking next targets in Syria, or did EWG take away missiles from the Su-24? And I do not have any, much less Israeli arrogance.
          Quote: Uryukc
          You set high requirements, I draw conclusions on what I can see from Russia:

          That’s the whole difference between us. I draw conclusions from countries, not from Israel.
          Quote: Uryukc
          First of all, they are Russophobic Israeli media;

          Which ones? 10,11,22 channels of Izr. TV and newspapers: Maariv, I. Ochronot, Ha-Arez. Jerusalem. Post? I assure you that about Russia in them it’s not just not bad, but nothing at all. Israiltian is generally to a small extent interested in what is happening abroad and so here everything is boiling with the speed of a collider.
          Quote: Uryukc
          a strange position in relation to the Palestinians - "we here retreated for 2000 thousand years, well, in general, this is our land"
          It’s strange for you sitting in the Russian Federation, but as you come, you’ll immediately decide, it’s easy here.

          Quote: Uryukc
          and these people still reproach us with Crimea;

          Who is reproaching you? We did not even introduce an embargo, but rather strengthened relations. Let’s link where Israel denounced something.
          Quote: Uryukc
          repatriates in a mentoring tone arguing that in Russia only cabbage soup can eat bread, and you have a technological singularity there.

          With this it’s even easier, people who see the differences between the systems are constantly comparing something. When I get to Russia, I always find myself feeling that the Brownian movement is around.
          Quote: Uryukc
          Which, however, does not stop me from admiring Israeli technology and the organization of law enforcement agencies, the most delicious figs I ate were grown in the Israeli desert.
          And in general, I have nothing against Israel, Israelis and Jews. And such friction is commonplace.

          You see, but I, unlike you, know where it is not necessary to admire, but to criticize. And I criticize more than admire, because the more I criticize, the more I will admire.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. Uryukc
        Uryukc 23 July 2016 16: 48
        0
        BY SABJ

        Quote: MACCABI-TLV
        because you don’t have enough fighters and missiles to them, and even more don’t have enough money to chase light tactical UAVs.


        I suspect that we have more fighters than UAVs in Israel, and there are so many more missiles, they would have been cheaper than unmanned aerial vehicles, we have fuel too, even if it is loaded. And in order to earn money, I personally would take a managerial decision and go to the overpowered Saudi Arabia (as a terrorist organization), and on the rise in oil prices, they would normally rise like that. In general, do not worry, we have enough for everyone.

        Quote: MACCABI-TLV
        with their EPR you can try to direct the earth-air, as it turns out inform!


        I inform you: by radio correction or laser correction, a missile with a remote fuse, a low ESR for our modern radars is such a problem, but the effect of the horizon and selection, this is problematic. Well, I did not say that there will be no problems, but hemorrhoids are solved.

        Quote: MACCABI-TLV
        Yes, it’s necessary, because the break of the radio channel is cases that go beyond the rules so far


        Well, when you encounter this problem, you will have to rewrite the rules, I repeat to you once again it’s not accidental to adopt equipment.
      5. MACCABI-TLV
        MACCABI-TLV 23 July 2016 20: 09
        0
        Quote: Uryukc
        And in order to earn money, I personally would take a managerial decision and go to the overpowered Saudi Arabia (as a terrorist organization), and on the rise in oil prices, they would normally rise like that. In general, do not worry, we have enough for everyone.

        "I have no more questions" (c)
        Quote: Uryukc
        Well, I did not say that there will be no problems, but hemorrhoids are solved.

        Well, that's how it will be solved in 90% of cases ...
        Quote: Uryukc
        Well, when you encounter this problem, you will have to rewrite the rules, I repeat to you once again it’s not accidental to adopt equipment.

        Well, you have to and will have to, after the last entry to Gaza, we decided to transfer all the infantry from the M-113 to the APC. The name was converted from Merkava MK2. Rewrote the rules? Just like that. It's completely normal. By rewriting the rules, we’ll also earn a couple of billion (we don’t have oil, so no one needs to be bombed) wink
  • The comment was deleted.
  • DimanC
    DimanC 18 July 2016 10: 37
    0
    Well, not everything is so obvious. It is enough to recall the mattress covers with their WWII radio fuses on the ship’s anti-aircraft guns and repeat all this at the modern level. Then a light UAV will simply fall off from the shock wave of a shell bursting nearby, not to mention the fragments ...
  • Cresta999
    Cresta999 18 July 2016 14: 27
    +2
    Sheer stupidity! First, the bird is "made" of other materials. That is why it has less exposure, and not because it has a small size. Secondly, even a bird can be captured as a target through the optical channel. In one of the films dedicated to the SU-25, if my memory serves me right, its developer told how they trained on birds (crows). They set up an experiment to see if the system could keep the bird as a target. I kept it. And this is a fairly old technique. UAVs are not a panacea. Any drone needs to have feedback from the operator if it works in real time. If not, he has no practical value as a scout. And in order to transmit intelligence information in real time, a sufficiently powerful and most importantly broadband signal is needed! It is much easier to jam such a signal than just a radio broadcast. And at the expense of the "snake" on the UAV - he laughed heartily. Try to get started with a radio-controlled helicopter. You will understand why the idea is funny. And besides, firing rockets at such targets is stupid. It is much more effective to fire a second volley of 30 mm shells from a pair of barrels. There is no need to hit - just put a lead barrier into which the UAV will fly by itself. With its strength, the result is predictable.
    1. Operator
      Operator 18 July 2016 15: 26
      0
      You probably don’t fundamentally read comments about the unsuccessful interception of a single UAV using as many as three anti-aircraft missiles, the artificial intelligence of piloting aircraft and do not watch the video of operational overload achieved when maneuvering an UAV in air.

      Then your "second volley of 30-mm shells from a pair of barrels" becomes clear.
      1. Cresta999
        Cresta999 18 July 2016 18: 38
        0
        Did you understand your question? Or was it a statement? What are you talking about?
      2. Alex_Tug
        Alex_Tug 23 July 2016 01: 40
        0
        do not read comments about the unsuccessful interception of a single UAV with the help of as many as three anti-aircraft missiles


        When they stop quoting garbage about three missiles.
        There were 2 of them and they were given a command for self-destruction. did not begin to shoot down the Russian drone. patrietically, Israel shot down drones 2 times.
        [media = http: // https: //www.youtube.com/watch? v = 7U5vn9dNhAM]
        1. Parsec
          Parsec 23 July 2016 02: 05
          0
          Quote: Alex_Tug
          When they stop quoting garbage about three missiles.
          There were 2 of them and they were given a command for self-destruction. did not shoot down the Russian drone


          Those. fired a rocket / two, and after ten seconds they either changed their minds, or as a bad detective, instructed not to shoot down, or the commander was so reflective.

          Or they decided to show - we can shoot it down, but this is a Russian UAV, so we won’t be there yet, and as a result there’s a splash in the calo with splashes all over the world?

          Do not fantasize.
          1. Alex_Tug
            Alex_Tug 23 July 2016 02: 18
            0
            Do not fantasize.


            And here are my fantasies. Just the facts. Deal with the source itself (like me), and do not believe all the chain reprints. Read Israeli sources for the 19th. How many minutes does a 4 km drone fly? At first they pulled and in a couple of minutes they managed to find out that the drone was Russian (and not hezboll, as suggested) and gave the command for self-liquidation. An explosion of one rocket injured the girl.
            1. MACCABI-TLV
              MACCABI-TLV 23 July 2016 14: 34
              0
              you're not right. (to put it mildly)
    2. sa-ag
      sa-ag 18 July 2016 15: 28
      0
      Quote: Cresta999
      Muting such a signal is much simpler than just broadcasting.

      Oil oil, explain the idea, how to drown out a broadband signal with pseudo-random frequency tuning than "just a radio broadcast"? And if there is a satellite communication channel?
      1. Cresta999
        Cresta999 18 July 2016 18: 35
        +2
        The answer is:
        1. Direction finding signals from the frequency hopper were put into service in the 90s of the 20th century. There is nothing complicated to detect such a signal. Putting interference in only one part of the range in which the adjustment occurs, it is possible to interfere with the operation of the UAV.
        2. A telemetric signal is easier to detect for the reason that it occupies a larger frequency spectrum than a radio transmission signal. And much more. So all such signals are in the upper frequency range. Therefore, knowing the physics, it can be assumed that the signal source should be at a line of sight. This means that the level of our interference will definitely be sufficient to suppress or disrupt stable communication. Since the telemetry signal contains constantly changing data, it is enough to interrupt it periodically to disrupt stable operation.
        3. Satellite communication channel is no different from any other communication channel. There are the same radio waves. :) Only high frequency for the passage of the ionosphere.
    3. Uryukc
      Uryukc 18 July 2016 21: 49
      0
      “In one of the films dedicated to the SU-25, if my memory serves me right, its developer told how they trained on birds (crows).

      Memory still changes)))
      This is about the automatic gun MI-28.

      According to sabzh, and if you still use the A-220 with a correctable remotely detonated projectile, then generally lepot, by a shot at an UAV.
  • Come on
    Come on 19 July 2016 02: 44
    0
    on the basis of the BTR Boxer, 3 km radius of destruction, and not at full power, the Germans say that 50 kW is possible, and this is even further and brighter. Knocks everything down to the size of a bird. And I don't think that UAVs will be taught to fly like a snake, I don't see the point. The advantages of a laser are precisely that they can directly catch the target, which simplifies the LMS and makes it more accurate and reliable. Well, other advantages such as endless ammo, no lead and ballistics. In short, in my opinion, today's development of combat lasers and their demonstration showed the future of weapons. If already now we were able to cram a laser with a range of 3 km into an armored personnel carrier, then in 10 years all, or partly DUBMs of all kinds of armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, etc. will be equipped with such lasers.
  • Locksmith
    Locksmith 26 December 2016 09: 39
    0
    Quote: Operator
    There is no reception against scrap - a small-sized UAV performing the "snake" anti-aircraft maneuver is invulnerable to shells and lasers, and its cost is less than the cost of an anti-aircraft missile.

    Fly, as the most modern and maneuverable UAV, also thinks that it performs "anti-aircraft maneuvers" and for some time manages to fool the "air defense missile system operator" in the form of a flying newspaper, but everything is decided by software and experience laughing
  • Leto
    Leto 18 July 2016 07: 17
    +6
    All this is true in the case of small military conflicts such as Ukraine, Syria or Iraq at the present time. In conflicts, the "hotter" side using UAVs will primarily use them to open the ground air defense system, forcing the enemy to open their locations. At the same time, the time between determining the location of the air defense missile system / radar and the application of an air strike on the object will be minimal. Israel tested all this in the last century and quite effectively.
    Therefore, the UAV countermeasures will have to be lifted into the air, and special UAV fighters will appear. Turboprop fighters (or even piston) with cannon armament and radar.
    1. Aqela
      Aqela 18 July 2016 11: 14
      0
      As you can see from my comment above, I fully support your point of view, 100%.
    2. vpm
      vpm 18 July 2016 13: 45
      0
      There are a lot of options, like an unmanned mini-AWACS and a "cloud" UAV-kamikaze :)
      By the way, if not for fuel consumption, then there are already options for miniature turbojet engines like jetcat, RC models are already doing their best, speed is up to 250 km / h according to the creators themselves: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_OqgipcULI
      One problem, turbojet engine eats fuel equivalent to its mass in 1 minute.
    3. Uryukc
      Uryukc 18 July 2016 23: 58
      -1
      Well, don’t need to shoot down drones with beeches, unless they are strategic, willow + willow tungusks (shells) + promising complexes (such as A-220) will solve the problem. Although the position after the launches would be better of course to change. And besides, the enemy using UAVs have yet to gain superiority in the air.
  • Nicola Bari
    Nicola Bari 18 July 2016 07: 22
    +2
    Actual article, interesting.

    Perhaps only electronic warfare can fully be useful in this fight; it is quite possible that UAVs - UAV fighters - will appear and everything will start all over again.
    1. ICT
      ICT 18 July 2016 07: 34
      0
      Quote: Nicola Bari
      EW can fully be useful

      anything can be useful, the problem is that the UAV can be in the territory
      the enemy and completely conveys information about you
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 18 July 2016 10: 07
        +4
        Quote: TIT
        anything can be useful, the problem is that the UAV can be in the territory
        the enemy and completely conveys information about you


        ... :)))))))))))))))))))))
        My friends, somehow bought the Chinese copters to their children in DR ...
        But, having mastered this miracle themselves, they took them away from the child and began to see what was behind other people's windows and bedrooms ...
        laughing
        Quote: sanya.vorodis
        And the enemy is watching the UAV and does not react in any way?

        "enemy", that is, the neighbors - complain accordingly to the wives of the heroes ...
        ;)))))))))))))))
        1. Monarchist
          Monarchist 19 July 2016 11: 11
          +1
          Family scenes begin, and as they say on an amateur
    2. Aqela
      Aqela 18 July 2016 11: 22
      +2
      Well, the "shell-armor" duel has not been canceled, and it will never be canceled ... wink
      At the same time, EW, as it seems to me, will undoubtedly be useful for all sorts of "underdogs", i.e. purely remotely controlled vehicles. But for the destruction of aircraft with the possibility of autonomous flight, such as cruise missiles or drones with the ability to automatically fly along a given route and automatically perform programmed actions (well, there, video recording, dropping missiles, which will then be aimed at a beacon or illumination with a laser beam, etc. .) - EW will be a complicating, but not decisive factor.
      Let's just say this: I agree with your point of view on the importance of electronic warfare, but I believe that such measures may not be useful on their own, but among a range of air defense measures. request
  • Professor
    Professor 18 July 2016 08: 08
    +7
    Yesterday, a Syrian (most likely Russian) drone flew into the Golan. They launched it 3 (THREE) two Patriots and one air-to-air missile, and the drone safely returned to Syria.

    Fighting drones is not a trivial thing.

    Syrian drone violated Israeli airspace
    1. Leto
      Leto 18 July 2016 08: 16
      -1
      Quote: Professor
      On it launched 3 (THREE) Patriots, and the drone safely returned to Syria.

      And they write that they shot down ...
      1. Professor
        Professor 18 July 2016 08: 27
        +1
        Quote: Leto
        And they write that they shot down ...

        I posted a link to you ...
        1. iwind
          iwind 18 July 2016 10: 01
          +1
          Quote: Professor
          Quote: Leto
          And they write that they shot down ...

          I posted a link to you ...


          I read about the suppression of air defense, now the UAV will fulfill a very important role. (Reb, RTR, create false avia wings.) There was a good report from the US Air Force, but I can not find anything. I'll find it off.
          Here they write to shoot down a UAV 20 km from the target, of course it is possible, but it was too late, he completed his task.
        2. Leto
          Leto 18 July 2016 10: 53
          -1
          Quote: Professor

          I posted a link to you ...

          Thanks, I already found it, I really dumped it and hurt people with fragments of a rocket ...
        3. Aqela
          Aqela 18 July 2016 11: 59
          +1
          And why am I agree with you for once, Professor? fellow
          One note: it seems like two missiles were fired, but there were three attempts to shoot down. Such a discrepancy may be due to the fact that there were also unsuccessful attempts to capture the target. Well, like, "almost fired!"
          The humor of the situation is that it seems like Russia is buying UAVs from Israel? laughing
          By the way, where are there all sorts of glorified "iron domes" and so on, capable of ripping apart mortar mines and MLRS shells casually? request
          It seems like the use of "Patriots" is worth a non-illusory dough comparable to a fighter-interceptor, well, like "Kfir" or something ... wassat
          The cost of supplying 9 batteries (4 launchers per battery) of the Patriot systems can reach up to $ 9 billion (includes: 36 launchers of the Patriot SAM PAC-3 (9 batteries of 4 launchers), 288 launchers of the Patriot PAC-3 , 216 missiles with advanced GEM-T guidance, 10 sets of phased array radars, 10 target acquisition control stations).
          (http://www.dialog.ua/news/29008_1416684174)

          Isho One Quote (2014) yes
          (http://xn--b1aga5aadd.xn--p1ai/2014/%D0%98%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F1
          /)
          The Spanish Ministry of Defense will acquire two batteries of the Patriot air defense missile system from the German Armed Forces.
          Each purchased battery will include 5 launchers, TsAMTO reports. The package will also include the ICC (Information Coordination Central), transport-loading machines and communications. In addition, about 40 anti-aircraft guided missiles and additional equipment for logistics will be delivered.
          The transaction approved by the Spanish government is 41,163 million euros (about 51 million dollars). Payments are planned to be distributed over five years, until 2018.

          Those. There is no direct information, but according to indirect data, one rocket costs the buyer about 1 lemon bucks. drinks hi
          1. Professor
            Professor 18 July 2016 12: 40
            +4
            Quote: Aqela
            By the way, where are there all sorts of glorified "iron domes" and so on, capable of ripping apart mortar mines and MLRS shells casually?

            But it was not deployed there. Now deployed.

            Quote: Aqela
            It seems like the use of "Patriots" is worth a non-illusory dough comparable to a fighter-interceptor, well, like "Kfir" or something ...

            And with this, everything is simple. It’s time to dispose of them, but it’s worth it unmeasured. It’s cheaper to fire them.

            Quote: Operator
            That's what life-giving (anti-aircraft) maneuver does laughing

            This is what a low-flying low-flying target does.

            PS
            Respect to the AOI press service for publishing the data on the incident.
            1. Operator
              Operator 18 July 2016 13: 13
              +1
              It’s interesting, with what overload does the winged drone maneuver in the video - more or less than the operational overload of anti-aircraft missiles (do not offer video of helicopter drones, overloads are already over the top of 40 g there now)?

          2. MACCABI-TLV
            MACCABI-TLV 18 July 2016 17: 05
            -1
            Quote: Aqela
            One note: it seems like two rockets were fired, and there were three attempts to shoot down. This discrepancy may be due to the fact that there were also unsuccessful attempts to capture the target.

            Infa is not 100500% but apparently, they also tried to bring down the Air Force. (But this is only a rumor).
    2. Operator
      Operator 18 July 2016 09: 43
      +1
      That's what life-giving (anti-aircraft) maneuver does laughing
      1. Parsec
        Parsec 19 July 2016 01: 35
        0
        This is not a maneuver.
        This is a small EPR of the target and the failure of the radio fuse.
  • avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 18 July 2016 08: 31
    0
    A small-sized drone scout will perform its functions only until it is detected, then it will be suppressed (if desired and necessary) by all available means, if there are enough of them in the affected area. It is with this necessity and sufficiency that we must reckon.
    1. Aqela
      Aqela 18 July 2016 12: 10
      0
      Due to the resistance to the external effects of any UAVs ranging from a school model airplane and a Po-2 airplane to an ANT-25 airplane (on which Chkalov Valera dissected), it is not the impact power that is important in measures to eliminate an UAV (although this is more desirable than in American laser systems), and accuracy and range ... I think that conventional army systems will be of little use at a distance of more than 1 km.
  • AlNikolaich
    AlNikolaich 18 July 2016 08: 40
    +3
    The task ahead is hemorrhoids and costly! Drones are cheap, they can be stamped and brought into battle by the thousands!
    -The target is aerial, group! number up to two thousand units! ... And what do you want to do? And now work is underway on micro-drones, and the theory of "smart dust" continues to be developed ... And if the means of detecting and tracking the target are still quickly brought into line with the threat, there will be enough computing power, then the means of destruction are full of seams! A bunch of drones will "spam" any air defense system!
    1. Aqela
      Aqela 18 July 2016 12: 18
      +1
      Smart Dust Crashing Smart Vacuum Cleaner wink laughing
      I believe that small UAVs are unlikely to be very smart, which means that measures of 1) electronic warfare (to stun them), 2) ammunition that forms an electromagnetic pulse (burn the "brains" to hell!), 3) at short distances ( up to 1-2 km), fragmentation or shrapnel ammunition with remote detonation can work on them, 4) and a volumetric explosion will not be bad (a kind of "super-fly swatter"!) or a vortex cannon (WWII project), 5) in the end, on single or group UAVs with a propeller or a type of helicopter, it can be triggered at a short distance by throwing a net, setting up barrage balloons, etc. even old technologies can be useful ... Only at a new technological level request
      But make fun of it, brothers: a flock of such small bastards flies, and a couple of helicopters go against them and rake them in a net like a herring trawler! fellow good
      1. Operator
        Operator 18 July 2016 12: 54
        +1
        In June 2016, artificial intelligence first defeated the Air Force pilot in virtual aerial combat.

        The program that fought against the pilot was installed on a computer worth 500 dollars

        http://korrespondent.net/lifestyle/gadgets/3704988-yskusstvennyi-yntellekt-pobed


        yl-pylota-vvs-ssha
        1. Verdun
          Verdun 18 July 2016 16: 44
          -1
          Quote: Operator
          The program that fought against the pilot was installed on a computer worth 500 dollars
          A real airplane simulator, as well as its software, costs a lot of money. Trying to simulate an air battle on a desktop PC is a profanity. At the same time, the power of a modern gaming computer is barely enough to normally drive a car at speeds up to 100 km / h. So for now, this is only a PR victory.
          1. Operator
            Operator 18 July 2016 17: 43
            +1
            At the disposal of the pilot and artificial intelligence was a modern and expensive simulator that simulates the behavior of an airplane. AI (as well as the pilot) only asked the tactical drawing of the battle - for this, a computer for 500 bucks was enough (at least as stated in the original source of information).
            1. Verdun
              Verdun 18 July 2016 18: 26
              0
              Quote: Operator
              at least as stated in the original source of information

              500 bucks is not a very powerful PC and a cheap joystick. Only renting an air simulator costs at least 3000 rubles per hour. I would venture to suggest that the "source of information" is lying. Commercials and "Il-2 - Forgotten Battles" can be called an air simulator. Moreover, what does it mean
              AI (as well as the pilot) only asked the tactical drawing of the battle
              ? This is a simulator, not a command post game.
    2. MACCABI-TLV
      MACCABI-TLV 18 July 2016 17: 08
      0
      Quote: AlNikolaich
      Drones are cheap, they can be stamped and brought into battle by the thousands!

      Well, not really. But drones are right - hemorrhoid.
  • K-50
    K-50 18 July 2016 09: 20
    +3
    As a result of exposure to the plastic aggregates of the target within 10-15 seconds, several parts ignited with the formation of an open flame.

    And these "eccentrics" want to shoot down ICBM warheads and cruise missiles with such a beam, which are equipped with thermal protection systems and flying at speeds many times greater? belay
    Yes, they will heat up one target for a day, which will land on the target for a long time !!!! laughing
    1. vpm
      vpm 18 July 2016 13: 12
      +1
      At hyper speeds around the aircraft there is also a plasma cloud ...
      I think seriously considering all the physics of the process, they did not really rely on lasers in this matter, however, getting into a kinetic interceptor maneuvering at this speed is also a non-trivial task.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • sivuch
    sivuch 18 July 2016 09: 25
    +8
    There is one more nuance about which so far no word has been said - disposable kamikaze drones, like IAI HAROP.
    But they have already been successfully applied
    1. Parsec
      Parsec 19 July 2016 01: 49
      +2
      Quote: sivuch
      There is one more nuance about which so far no word has been said - disposable kamikaze drones, like IAI HAROP.
      But they have already been successfully applied


      Size 2.5x3 meters, resonant volumes - wings and rudders, piston engine, and therefore not a zero signature in the IR range; pushing screw, which means a good vortex trace and radar signal modulation.

      Both for the barrels and for the air defense system, the MD or MANPADS will be the target.

      PS This touched
      "The main goal of the Harop development, according to the Taasia Avrit" Concern, is to suppress enemy air defenses, destroy ZKP, missile silos (at the time of preparation for launch) "

      Buried command posts and missile silos are objects designed for resistance to an atomic explosion, and here the apparatus shaking the sky with a total weight of 135 kg.
      1. Operator
        Operator 19 July 2016 13: 14
        0
        And the vortex trace from the screw and where?
  • DimanC
    DimanC 18 July 2016 10: 42
    0
    The author sometimes contradicts himself: then his development of the UAV is ahead of the development of the ZRPK, but at the same time, the "traditional" means are good ... In general, either the cross must be removed, or the pants must be put on ...
    Well, as I already wrote above, rapid-fire anti-aircraft artillery with radio fuses is well suited against small UAVs. Here, the main problem is to detect in time, and already with what to shoot down - yes, from a Kalash, sitting in a trench. Over the Donbass, quite a lot has already been called, although "Shell" has not been noticed there.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Verdun
    Verdun 18 July 2016 12: 07
    0
    One of the latest examples of such systems is the Pantsir-C1 anti-aircraft missile and gun system
    On TV, they showed a plot where they tried to find and shoot down a radio-controlled copter with Shell. Nothing particularly impressive came of this. Against the background of the forest, the aircraft was not always detected, and the calculation of the anti-aircraft module could not hit the target. Only a rocket failed. It is difficult to say what is connected. Maybe the crew simply had no experience. Laser destruction systems are designed to dazzle the electronics of drones, and this still needs to be properly accessed.
    Modern devices with remote control support two-way communication via radio with the operator panel.
    Intercepting control is a good thing, but not all drones support feedback. But to disable such a device using a directed EMR or a powerful radio pulse - this is welcome. In this way, you can even attack group targets. It seems that the appearance of drones - drones hunters would be logical.
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 18 July 2016 19: 04
      +1
      Quote: Verdun
      On TV, they showed a plot where they tried to find and shoot down a radio-controlled copter with Shell. Nothing particularly impressive came of this ... It is difficult to say what is connected. Maybe the crew simply had no experience.


      it’s not in experience - it’s just a complex of guns and ammunition used on the Shell that is not corny adapted to destroy MBLA — there is neither the required accuracy of the guns, nor the required fire density, nor the suitable projectile for it.
      In general, it is no longer a secret that the 30mm guns of the Shell and Tunguska are outdated, and do not meet modern requirements.
      The situation could be improved by the introduction of an ammunition shell into the ammunition with remote detonation, but this is still deaf. Yes, and in a small caliber they are not so effective, plus quite expensive.
      You need either a larger caliber or an increase in the density of fire.
      We need new guidance and tracking systems (or improved algorithms for old ones).
      In general, modernization is long overdue.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 18 July 2016 12: 43
    0
    Counteraction should be comprehensive, including EM interference for drones, communication disruption and attempts to shoot.
  • Vadim237
    Vadim237 18 July 2016 12: 54
    0
    Shell C1 - and in the arsenal of Russia in general, how many?
    1. sivuch
      sivuch 18 July 2016 13: 37
      0
      To date, dozens of BM. Only to the air defenses of the SV they are still no sideways. There so far only the Tunguska (whether modernized or not, is unknown)
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 18 July 2016 15: 19
    0
    in the air defense of the SV they were waiting for the Carapace-based Shell, the existing platform was Belorussian, they were waiting for the Russian. The wheelbase is not suitable for us. patency is not the same. A S-400 and Kamaz can well accompany.
  • TOR2
    TOR2 18 July 2016 20: 48
    0
    According to some reports, the possibility of using electromagnetic systems against drones that hit a target with a powerful pulse is currently being studied at a theoretical level.

    This system will become the main one. A "shot" from a microwave installation is much cheaper than the cost of a UAV. Screens made of mesh or foil will help at best at border distances.
    A laser locator is more suitable for detecting small UAVs. In this case, even a UAV made of composites will be detected by an air defense system. Surely the development of such modules is already underway, there is simply no information in the public domain.
    1. Operator
      Operator 18 July 2016 21: 15
      0
      A metal foil screen reflects EMP of any power.

      What is a microwave installation - is it a radar?

      The main thing is not to detect a small, cheap and super-maneuverable UAV with an optical, acoustic or radar (and still distinguish the drone from birds), but to shoot it down (this is a big problem).
      1. TOR2
        TOR2 19 July 2016 13: 25
        0
        Quote: Operator
        A metal foil screen reflects EMP of any power.

        Resist the EMP pulse under the force of a Faraday cage, and then its effectiveness will depend not only on the material but also on the wall thickness. After such an upgrade, the UAV will have the functionality of a broiler chicken. That we have not yet considered external devices and UAV antennas that are located outside.
        Quote: Operator
        What is a microwave installation - is it a radar?

        If it is extremely simple, then the emitter is a directional microwave pulse.
        Quote: Operator
        and knock it (this is a big problem).

        Dies in a split second. There is little information in the public domain. Watch the movie "Electronic Wars".
        1. Operator
          Operator 19 July 2016 14: 13
          0
          A Faraday cage made of a metal mesh (and not of rods) is used to partially screen large-sized objects such as buildings and structures. 100 percent shielded metal foil is used in all other cases.

          A radar, therefore, is not a radiator of a directed microwave pulse?
  • Bormanxnumx
    Bormanxnumx 18 July 2016 20: 57
    0
    Quote: Verdun
    On TV, they showed a plot where they tried to find and shoot down a radio-controlled copter with Shell. Nothing particularly impressive came of this. Against the background of the forest, the aircraft was not always detected, and the calculation of the anti-aircraft module could not hit the target. Only a rocket failed. It is difficult to say what is connected. Maybe the crew simply had no experience. Laser destruction systems are designed to dazzle the electronics of drones, and this still needs to be properly accessed.

    On TV, they also showed how Pantsirem tried to shoot down the La-17 target aircraft (5-meter crap from the mid-60s). arc like water from a garden hose. Shot down with a missile, for infrared guidance, pvd is a "tidbit"
    1. Parsec
      Parsec 19 July 2016 02: 00
      0
      Quote: BORMAN82
      La-17 target aircraft (5-meter crap with air defense of the mid-60s release)


      La-17MM installed turbojet engine R-9VK.
      1. Bormanxnumx
        Bormanxnumx 19 July 2016 10: 07
        0
        I admit a mistake in determining the type of engine repeat it is an impression of shooting, to put it mildly, depressing.
  • RF Armed Forces 12345678
    RF Armed Forces 12345678 19 July 2016 11: 19
    0
    I believe that in order to combat modern UAVs, small-caliber high-speed automatic guns with shells exploding after a certain period of time are needed.
    1. Bormanxnumx
      Bormanxnumx 19 July 2016 13: 27
      0
      At the moment, no one will be engaged in a special gun and ammunition for hitting a UAV. I can be mistaken, now there are no artillery shells with programmable air blasting with a caliber of less than 40 mm.
      1. RF Armed Forces 12345678
        RF Armed Forces 12345678 19 July 2016 13: 48
        0
        But technically there is such an opportunity. And such a gun can be constructed on the basis of a widely used sample, for example, an AK-630 gun mount.
        1. Bormanxnumx
          Bormanxnumx 19 July 2016 14: 42
          0
          But will not the AK-630 be used very heavily for such purposes?
          1. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 19 July 2016 19: 22
            +1
            AU-220M just suits - 57 mm, the ability to mount on any medium, heavy platform and the ability to remotely detonate - the main guidance on the target. In this light, it would be nice to look at the base of the T-72: both the infantry / tank fire support vehicle (especially in urban conditions), and the protection against UAV barrage.
          2. RF Armed Forces 12345678
            RF Armed Forces 12345678 20 July 2016 09: 16
            0
            I cited purely as an example of a base for such a memory
  • tim1986
    tim1986 20 July 2016 01: 48
    0
    the shell-C for the fight against small UAVs is absolutely not suitable, alas
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 20 July 2016 23: 09
      0
      Justify. what's wrong.
      Radar? artillery weapons?
  • Uryukc
    Uryukc 20 July 2016 02: 19
    0
    Quote: MACCABI-TLV
    Yeah, of course, here 2 Patriots PAC2, and missiles air-to-air could not.


    Patriots are no match for the latest modifications of our complexes.
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 20 July 2016 23: 10
      0
      Patriots are no match for the latest modifications of our complexes.


      But who told you this? In fact, they have been modifying their patriots for the last 20 years.
  • asr55
    asr55 8 February 2021 19: 39
    0
    In Russia, effective measures to combat UAVs have long been developed. Rosoboronexport presented an effective system of echeloned defense against UAVs. It includes the latest anti-drones, including "Repellent", "Sapsan-Bekas", "Kupol", "Rubezh-Avtomatika", "Luch" and "Pishchal". "This system provides reliable protection of territories and facilities from both individual drones and their groups, including swarms of drones." Active protection against UAVs is provided by the "Reppelent" electronic warfare complex, developed and manufactured by "Defense Systems" JSC. "It detects the UAV itself and the ground control station by the radio signals they transmit, recognizes the type of drone and the direction of its movement, and then suppresses its communication channels, depriving control and navigation. The uniqueness of this complex lies in the ability to suppress all drone control channels." "Repellant" is capable of detecting and suppressing UAVs at a distance of at least 30 km. Such an electronic warfare complex can operate at any time of the year, in any climatic zones and in the most unfavorable weather conditions, including dust, rain and strong winds.
    The Sapsan-Bekas, Kupol and Rubezh-Avtomatika complexes, the Avtomatika concern's product line, are intended to cover the most important infrastructure facilities. The first of them is capable of detecting UAVs at a distance of up to 20 km and suppressing UAV control and navigation channels at a distance of up to 30 km. Can conduct circular observation or scan a given sector.