Russian defence against drone swarms

I got to thinking, what could be the best existing aircraft type for converting and developing drone hunting drones? Than I realized the perfect aircraft for that role would be a dirt-cheap and very light STOL taildragger aircraft.






1.) These ultra-light, STOL taildragging aircraft are dirt cheap and incredibly versatile. They're capable of operating in severe headwinds and severe arctic climates, they can take off and land virtually anywhere. Some pilots even managed to land and take off from sides of mountains. There STOL are nothing short of incredible, to the point where they rival VTOL aircraft.

They've been demonstrated to reliable land within a dozen meters, and takeoff within a couple meters. Their incredible STOL capability, their capability to take off and land on unprepared airstrips, and just about any surface in any climate, their light weight mass combined with dirt-cheap prices means they're great candidates to be incorporated in to VKS IAD SAM regiments. They can go anywhere their all terrain vehicles can go, and they're dirt cheap.

https://air.one/aircraft-showroom/just-aircraft-superstol-xl/

In fact, to further extrapolate how dirt-cheap these taildragging planes can possibly be, The Just Air Just STOL XL kit only costs $72 thousand USD. A similar Russia built kit would probably cost approx. $1,000 USD a piece. With all the bells and whistles (UCAV add-ons) would make it approximately $5,000 USD a piece. Not bad for something that can easily destroy several $10 million IAI Harop drones!  

2.) The performance of such aircraft could be improved by utilizing electric motors/engines. These types of aircraft can get up to 1000km range (with a low power diesel piston engine), and a SuperOx electric engine while being lighter than a conventional diesel piston-engine aircraft, could probably quadruple the range to 4,000km which would allow to loiter all day to intercept UAV's/UCAV's. The development of graphene batteries could further improve the range. Coaxial blades could even further improve performance.

3.) The wings should be designed to fold back like a naval deck helicopter, and the aircraft could be stored in a shipping container, with disposable manpad tubes, batteries, parts and spares and repair equipment all stored in a standard shipping container. It'll be transported on a Kamaz truck (like Pantsir), with a crew of three at the helm: driver, airplane mechanic, and drone pilot. The shipping container could have a ramp and dolly system to guide the drone crane cargo taildragger out safely in a compressed state (It should have a variable pneumatic suspension). They could have 4 of these aircraft, capable of covering 4 different directions per company/battery level of SAM groupings. They would be controlled and given guidance and targeting information by command posts within the company/battery grouping of SAMs.

4.) The landing gear and build should be similar to a crane cargo helicopter the difference being that the landing gear is attached to the wing, as it would be a 'Monoplane' (or perhaps a variable biplane). The crew cabin would be absent. The landing gear could be further improved if the rear wheel was actually two wheels compressed together while taking off, but would have an extending telescope pole in between them that widen before the end of the flight, for greater landing stability.


The modular cargo compartment would have disposable tubes of Verba manpads, and no need for rotary launcher, the tubes would be stacked on top of each other. The modular compartment would have 4 stacks of 5 stacked tubes, with 20 tubes total in the modular compartment, with arm that extend out the compartment that would launch the manpad missiles. The mass of Verba is usually given as 17.25kg, but that's the weight of the entire manpad, not necessarily of the missile. The missile is probably half that at 8.5kg. A modern light STOL taildragger UCAV aircraft with similar specifications to the Just Aircraft's Superstol XL, would have a useful payload of 1000lbs/455kg, so 20 9K333 Verba missiles weighing 8.5 kg in disposable tubes wouldn't even surpass the 50% useful payload mark. The '20' 8.5kg tubes would way 170kg, the weapons container would way 30kg, with max container weighing 200kg. They could slave a PKT gun with 1000 rounds to EO ball on the top of the aircraft, or alternatively Kord machinegun with 200 rounds. Only then will the payload start meeting 50% of the max payload.


https://justaircraft.com/specifications/

The radar and EO ball would be stored on top of the plane. The electric motor/batteries would power them, and the ultraviolet, near-infrared, mid-infrared portion could be cooled using magnetic refrigeration powered by the electric motor (or the cold air while in mid-flight if that's more practical).

5.) As already mentioned it should have a multi-purpose pneumatic suspension, which could be used to inflate the tires, which should be inflated for various variable sizes (for snow or landing on water), and for the the landing gear, and optionally (if they make a biplane model) to raise an additional compressed wing on top to make the monoplane in to a biplane for potentially better performance.

6.) These aircraft could be also useful in civilian rescue and emergency situations, with the ability to drop off critical supplies.

I would say the new generation IIR optics and new MMW radar on the Mi-28NM and upgraded Kamovs along with laser command detonated 30mm cannon shells would make them ideal for engaging drones from very small to rather quite large....

Using sensors to find the drones and laser rangefinders to range them their ballistics computer and known trajectory of cannon shells and large airburst HE round should allow the efficient destruction of even very small cheap drones with a single shot most of the time.

Air burst is critical because you don't want a small light cheap aircraft flying around your airbase firing rifle calibre machine guns because even the rounds that hit will pass right through and create a threat to everything nearby because bullets don't just stop existing when they hit a target.

Blasing away with machine guns can result in defensive fire doing more damage than the drones do.

Light helicopter that is cheap to operate with a 40mm grenade launcher with airburst rounds that can patrol an area and fly above the target and shoot down at it so fragments go into the ground and are not dangerous over enormous distances... or fly low so grenades detonate upwards towards the targets... the fragments are light but would rapidly slow down so by the time they come down on the ground they will be harmless... unlike a rifle bullet for instance.

GarryB wrote:I would say the new generation IIR optics and new MMW radar on the Mi-28NM and upgraded Kamovs along with laser command detonated 30mm cannon shells would make them ideal for engaging drones from very small to rather quite large....

Using sensors to find the drones and laser rangefinders to range them their ballistics computer and known trajectory of cannon shells and large airburst HE round should allow the efficient destruction of even very small cheap drones with a single shot most of the time.

Air burst is critical because you don't want a small light cheap aircraft flying around your airbase firing rifle calibre machine guns because even the rounds that hit will pass right through and create a threat to everything nearby because bullets don't just stop existing when they hit a target.

Blasing away with machine guns can result in defensive fire doing more damage than the drones do.

Light helicopter that is cheap to operate with a 40mm grenade launcher with airburst rounds that can patrol an area and fly above the target and shoot down at it so fragments go into the ground and are not dangerous over enormous distances... or fly low so grenades detonate upwards towards the targets... the fragments are light but would rapidly slow down so by the time they come down on the ground they will be harmless... unlike a rifle bullet for instance.

So you don't see the value of aircraft such as this? Their incredible ability to land and takoff within extremely short distances just about anywhere, just about any surface, in any climate (even the harsh Arctic biome)? Their dirt cheap price? Their simplicity of their design? They would be built in very short time frames, and repairs would be very cheap, quick and simple.

A Mil Mi-28, a Kamov Ka-52 or even light Ansat attack helicopter could be effective drone killers, but they're not nearly as cost effective. Your talking hundreds of times more expensive than the UCAV tail draggers that I'm suggesting. The build times of these UCAV taildraggers (just like their cost) would be a fraction to that of any aircraft available. Because of their low cost and their simplicity they could easily build hundreds if not thousands per year. Their small size and simplicity could allow them to be designed with folding wings, and compressed suspensions so they could be loaded in to a shipping container. Unlike helicopters they can reliably land and take off angles/sloped hills, and they're basically able to go anywhere their all-terrain vehicles could go.

These features would be very pleasing to countries like Syria. They could easily be a hot export item because of all these features.

So you don't see the value of aircraft such as this? Their incredible ability to land and takoff within extremely short distances just about anywhere, just about any surface, in any climate (even the harsh Arctic biome)? Their dirt cheap price? Their simplicity of their design? They would be built in very short time frames, and repairs would be very cheap, quick and simple.

Of course they are useful aircraft, but not for hunting and dealing with drones.

A Mil Mi-28, a Kamov Ka-52 or even light Ansat attack helicopter could be effective drone killers, but they're not nearly as cost effective.

They are cost effective in the sense that they could better do the job in question.

An Ansat helicopter with a chin mounted 40mm grenade launcher with airburst grenades initiated by laser beam would be ideal... but ground based vehicles would be just as effective but also much cheaper.

Your talking hundreds of times more expensive than the UCAV tail draggers that I'm suggesting.

Would take enormous skill to shoot down tiny drones in a light aircraft... it makes much more sense to use sensors and gun turrets and computers and airburst cheap rounds.

The build times of these UCAV taildraggers (just like their cost) would be a fraction to that of any aircraft available. Because of their low cost and their simplicity they could easily build hundreds if not thousands per year. Their small size and simplicity could allow them to be designed with folding wings, and compressed suspensions so they could be loaded in to a shipping container. Unlike helicopters they can reliably land and take off angles/sloped hills, and they're basically able to go anywhere their all-terrain vehicles could go.

A small flat area to take off and land is easier to find than a long flat area for an aircraft to take off from.

Most anti drone work can be done by ground based platforms, though aircraft will contribute...

Most drones are likely to be taken down with jammers and EW weapons which means operating your own aircraft or drones in the area becomes hazardous too.

These features would be very pleasing to countries like Syria. They could easily be a hot export item because of all these features.

They would be very useful, but not against drone swarms IMHO.

"Krasukha" blinded over the Black sea attack drones of a simulated enemy

Electronic warfare units of the Russian military base in Abkhazia have defused a simulated enemy drone strike over the Black sea. To eliminate the drones, the Krasukha and Zhitel electronic warfare hardware complexes were used.


About 1.5 thousand military personnel and over 500 pieces of equipment were involved in the exercises.

"The personnel of the radar units on real targets completed the tasks of detecting unmanned aerial vehicles of a simulated enemy flying at minimum and medium altitudes in The black sea," the press service of the southern military district reported.

After detection and identification, the drones were exposed to electronic warfare systems and were taken out of operation.

Recall that last year, the troops began to receive upgraded versions of the Krasukha-20 complex. The full characteristics of the electronic warfare station are classified, but it is known that its range is 400 kilometers. In addition, electronic warfare systems of the Krasukha family were actively used in Syria, thanks to which a large number of terrorist drones were neutralized.

Jamming station R-330ZH "Resident" can simultaneously jam on 12 channels at a distance of 12-30 kilometers. The complex is also able to leave mobile and satellite subscribers without communication. Blocks the operation of navigation equipment, in addition, the "Resident" can act not only as a suppression station, but also as an electronic intelligence station.

By the way

Simultaneously with the actions in Abkhazia, snipers of the marine corps of the Caspian flotilla worked out ways to destroy unmanned aerial vehicles of a simulated enemy. To detect drones, Borisoglebsk complexes were used, and 12.7-mm asvk sniper complexes were used to destroy targets at an altitude of 40 to 500 meters.

https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en.en.f021612f-606b5871-a0c83d9f-74722d776562/https/rg.ru/2021/04/05/reg-ufo/kompleksy-krasuha-oslepili-nad-chernym-morem-udarnye-drony-protivnika.html