The rationale behind the Derivatsya for air defense against UAVs is the fact that the Pantsir, Tor and other missiles often cost more than the drones themselves. I personally see the Derivatsya 57mm gun more useful against ground targets.
Hey there... you have been quiet for a while... welcome back...
I would agree that the 57mm gun would be effective against ground targets, but so is the 100mm gun on the BMP-3 or the 125mm gun on tanks or a 57mm grenade launcher for that matter... not to mention the 120mm mortar and 152mm artillery resources at your disposal.
In comparison against UAVs we are talking about the choice of 30mm cannon shells, which would have a rather limited effective range, that are also a little small to have both a bursting charge, a useful number of metal fragments... and a fusing system to achieve airbursts.
57mm rounds on the other hand have space for a decent bursting charge... lots of good sized effective fragments and a rear facing fusing system that could be set off with a coded laser beam at the correct distance... which would eliminate the need for an expensive and very accurate timing system for a precise airburst.
Instead just have a laser detector on the base of the shell looking back and when the radar tracking the outgoing round determines it is about to cross paths with the target... flash a coded laser and set off the round... with the sensor in the base you can have front mounted fragments to form a dense cone of fragments towards the target but also good side fragmentation as well...
Wont be super cheap but cheaper and available in larger numbers than missiles... and with the processing on the vehicle you could command detonate the rounds at optimum times like passing a group of enemy drones it could be set off in the best position to damage them all.
I expect to see this gun on the T-15, the Kurganetz and even on the Boomerang... with the anti-air capability as a secondary role.
To be clear in this thread we have talked about two 57mm guns, the actual gun is a high velocity weapon for anti aircraft use, but also the line drawing mechanism of the autoloader for the grenade launcher model.
I rather suspect the high velocity 57mm gun will be the standard IFV turret mounted gun for use in the anti IFV role with APFSDS rounds.
I would also think that they might have mixed groups of vehicles with the high velocity 57mm gun and the medium velocity 57mm grenade launcher... both vehicles will have long range ATGMs (Kornet) and medium range mini ATGMs (Bulat... which seems to be a small scale Kornet for use against lighter vehicles and other targets), I think the 57mm grenade launches ammo will be cheaper and offer larger heavier more effective HE projectiles and will effectively replace the 100mm rifled gun of the BMP-3, while the high velocity 57mm gun offers the chance to penetrate similar and lighter vehicles (IFV and APCs and other command and other vehicles) at battlefield ranges.
The 57mm grenade launcher armed IFV would rely on Bulat missiles to engage like IFVs... and Kornets for tanks or long range shots at aircraft.
The 57mm high velocity gun can use Bulat for anything and Kornet for tanks and 57mm rounds for enemy IFVs and positions and aircraft at drones.
As for the Floks...I think it is a flop. It is just too big and too cumbersome. The Nona and Vena were better ideas.
I agree... I suspect the biggest feature of Floks is low cost and simplicity... while having the fire power of a 120mm mortar.
They already have their own 57mm being developed. This system is not just a gun but also a FCS which makes it an anti air system.
This system is certainly a dedicated air defence system, so it will be specialised for that role, but I think for IFVs they will use the same high velocity gun in the anti IFV role as NATO IFVs are 30 tons plus these days, and Bulat ATGMs for targets too heavy for the 57mm rounds.
They will likely fit this turret to Armata and Kurganets and Boomerang and even Typhoon to provide air support and anti drone capacity to standard units... I would think it would also be good for convoy escort and as an anti landing system (against marines and paratroopers).
I guess for logistical reasons they prefer a truck-mounted heavy support unit for use with truck-style APCs and combat vehicles.
I suspect cheap and simple are the key here... as long as the electronics and comms are up to scratch this should be a potent vehicle... (And I don't know why they wouldn't be up to scratch).