Anti-drone technologies and tactics

https://www.armyrecognition.com/new...o-nasams-air-defense-system-as-shortages-grow
"Norway is working to integrate Ukrainian-made interceptors or effectors into the NASAMS air defense system, according to statements made in Kyiv by Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide. The initiative focuses on reducing reliance on expensive missiles by enabling higher-volume production without altering NASAMS command, radar, or launcher architecture."

"Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide explained that Norway is simultaneously increasing air defense missile support to Ukraine and deepening industrial ties with Ukrainian defense manufacturers. He stressed that the key problem facing air defense today is that commonly used missiles are expensive and available in limited numbers, which makes sustained defense difficult. To address this, Norway wants weapons that can be produced more cheaply and in larger quantities without changing the existing air defense structure. "

"The potential Ukrainian missile list includes short-range options derived from the R-73, variants of the R-27 medium-range missile with infrared or radar homing guidance, and the UP-277 missile, which has an air-launched range of about 80 kilometers, even though ground-launched use would reduce that figure. In addition to missiles, Ukrainian interceptor drones are also being considered as effectors that could help counter low-cost aerial threats such as Shahed drones"
 
In addition to using AA-11 Archers and AA-10B/D Alamos I wonder if they will also look at Soviet-era AA-8 Aphids, AA-7B Apexs and AA-6B Acrids (If they are still in Ukraines missile inventory)?
 
NMaude said:
In addition to using AA-11 Archers and AA-10B/D Alamos I wonder if they will also look at Soviet-era AA-8 Aphids, AA-7B Apexs and AA-6B Acrids (If they are still in Ukraines missile inventory)?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure any of those dinosaurs are still safe to launch.
 
NMaude said:
Their energetics would have to be carefully examined and any expired ones replaced.
Click to expand...
Which takes time and equipment (usually X-Rays looking for cracks in the rockets). It's my understanding that the warheads are a lot longer-lived (any cracks would simply cause an explosion, which you want anyways)
 
NMaude said:
In addition to using AA-11 Archers and AA-10B/D Alamos I wonder if they will also look at Soviet-era AA-8 Aphids, AA-7B Apexs and AA-6B Acrids (If they are still in Ukraines missile inventory)?
Click to expand...

Scott Kenny said:
I'm not sure any of those dinosaurs are still safe to launch.
Click to expand...
The AA-8 Aphid is still in ukrainian inventory and used.
https://thedefensepost.com/2025/11/11/ukraine-r60-missiles/
There are also thousands of them in the stocks of former Warsaw Pact and allies countries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-60_(missile)#Current_operators
 
Multi projectile ammo

Three-bullet anti-UAV cartridges from TSKIB SOO:
5.45x39-mm SC-226 for firing at a range of up to 150 m
7.62x54R-mm SC-228 for firing at a range of up to 300 m

495571350-990329196606983-3467294753221647766-n.jpg

imagy.jpg


Last row is spread at 100m 118mm and 115mm more than enough for drone use.
bcdw.jpg


Somewhat supprising is use of s suppresor with multiprojectile ammo .


Similar concept
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQvBZKsdAAc
 
Here's a couple of new videos concerning the shutdown of that Geran 2 (Or is it a Shaheed 136) drone by a Ukrainian F-16 using its' M61:


This may look like shooting fish in a barrel, but in reality, using the 20mm cannon on the F-16 to take down kamikaze drones is very dangerous work.
Click to expand...


Russia’s long-range drones fly slow, low, and are notoriously hard to intercept—especially with a high-speed fighter like the F-16. That’s what makes this moment so shocking. A Ukrainian F-16 pilot takes down a Russian Geran-2 drone using an incredibly risky method, all caught on camera. The footage looks simple, but the reality is anything but. Watch the takedown—and then we’ll explain why this shot was far more dangerous than it seems.​
Click to expand...
 
Mr.T said:
Multi projectile ammo

Three-bullet anti-UAV cartridges from TSKIB SOO:
5.45x39-mm SC-226 for firing at a range of up to 150 m
7.62x54R-mm SC-228 for firing at a range of up to 300 m

495571350-990329196606983-3467294753221647766-n.jpg

imagy.jpg


Last row is spread at 100m 118mm and 115mm more than enough for drone use.
bcdw.jpg
Click to expand...
Oh, I want some of those for my collection! (in x54R) A sectioned case would be acceptable.


Mr.T said:
Somewhat supprising is use of s suppresor with multiprojectile ammo .

Click to expand...
Not surprising at all. Those projectiles are all full diameter, so there should not be much chance of a baffle strike. Not like trying to run shot through a suppressor.
 
Ainen said:
it's almost funny how much better US fighters are than rest of the world when it comes to drones. At least, in moment.
Click to expand...

The Ukrainians seem to be making good use with their F-16s shooting down Shaheed and Geran-2 drones (Mostly with the F-16's M61 Vulcan gun).
 
NMaude said:
The Ukrainians seem to be making good use with their F-16s shooting down Shaheed and Geran-2 drones (Mostly with the F-16's M61 Vulcan gun).
Click to expand...
It's yes and no. They're effective when compared to rest of Ukrainian defenses(fighters included), but overall system isn't effective even v key targets(LACMs). Granted, part of it is geography, proximity and completely different level of opponent. But part is just plain lack of ammo and effective sensors.

On the contrary, USAF fighters are so effective, they brought a paradigm shift. Without them, Iranian drone threat against Israel would've been effective (as it frankly was in the past even at far smaller scale and effort).
But F-15E is just a revolution in how everything is aligned on it. F-16(SABR units) and USMC F-18s are not too far behind, and the rest of the world...almost doesn't count when compared tbh.
 
Ainen said:
It's yes and no. They're effective when compared to rest of Ukrainian defenses(fighters included), but overall system isn't effective even v key targets(LACMs). Granted, part of it is geography, proximity and completely different level of opponent. But part is just plain lack of ammo and effective sensors.

On the contrary, USAF fighters are so effective, they brought a paradigm shift. Without them, Iranian drone threat against Israel would've been effective (as it frankly was in the past even at far smaller scale and effort).
But F-15E is just a revolution in how everything is aligned on it. F-16(SABR units) and USMC F-18s are not too far behind, and the rest of the world...almost doesn't count when compared tbh.
Click to expand...

Effectiveness to counter Irans drones had much to do with kung foo air fighting that was the iranian strike , where they basically told US admin where and when drones will be flying , allowing 3 days for the prepositioning of the whole fighter fleet ,most of which by the way had no AKPWS ,so no novel anti drone capability at all, then use 8+ hours flight on pre determined route and to shoot them down so both sides save face and don't need to continue shooting at each other.

Lots of theatrics involved in ME actions , same as at the time when US assassinated that general , where US and Iranians agreed to have them shot back at an empty US airbase while minimal personnel left got PTSD shting their pants in the bomb shelters. All theatrics save face for Iran no casualties for US. Anyone who thinks that was anything else than a show i have a bridge to sell you.
 
Mr.T said:
Effectiveness to counter Irans drones had much to do with kung foo air fighting that was the iranian strike , where they basically told US admin where and when drones will be flying , allowing 3 days for the prepositioning of the whole fighter fleet ,most of which by the way had no AKPWS ,so no novel anti drone capability at all, then use 8+ hours flight on pre determined route and to shoot them down so both sides save face and don't need to continue shooting at each other.
Click to expand...
Ukraine knows every night there will be strike, and by a strike design (likely deconfliction agreed with NATO) have hours of warning. Still fighters only occasionally shoot down even majority of LACMs(which are few); their contribution to drone defense is frankly nil.

Single seaters, no ESA, limited ammo availability tied with often outdated seekers, limited low altitude agility due to heavy tanks.
Note that APKWS is only a cream on top.
Mr.T said:
Lots of theatrics involved in ME actions , same as at the time when US assassinated that general , where US and Iranians agreed to have them shot back at an empty US airbase while minimal personnel left got PTSD shting their pants in the bomb shelters. All theatrics save face for Iran no casualties for US. Anyone who thinks that was anything else than a show i have a bridge to sell you.
Click to expand...
And suddenly, when in June Iran was shooting for its life, results of drone strikes improved dramatically. As you know, they in fact didn't.

Mass deployment of APKWS is a big part that freed IAF to bomb the shit out of Iran. Deployed CENTCOM forces and allies (of rather varied combat effectiveness) were enough to prevent anything reaching Israel.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom