Anti-drone technologies and tactics

Given the propeler pitch , lack of cooler and other aerodynamic points i highly doubt it comes close to 600kmh except in a vertical dive
spys_5-1.jpg
motor_g_vandal-1.jpg spys_4-1.jpg
 

How Ukraine tries to intercept Russian drones more effectively — and affordably​

Since last year, Kyiv has turned to Western fighter jets to shoot down aerial threats, but also rely on dispersed air defense teams and other modified aircraft.
Click to expand...
https://breakingdefense.com/2026/08...ssian-drones-more-effectively-and-affordably/

“Ukraine’s most significant adaptation is not the technology itself, but how formations from the brigade level down to the squad have absorbed and operationalized it. Lower-echelon units routinely assume responsibility for localized air defense, fires, and other functions traditionally associated with higher headquarters,” Van de Wall wrote. “These developments are driven by necessity. Ukrainian units cannot assume air superiority, spectrum dominance, or the successful suppression of enemy air defenses before maneuver. Instead, they operate under the expectation that these domains will remain contested throughout the fight.”
Click to expand...
 
Scott Kenny said:
What do you mean, given the propeller pitch?

That is an extremely aggressive pitch!
Click to expand...

A 600km/h drone with magic dust battery , top of the line Chinese T motor developed for record attempt ,and extremely egressive pitch carbon fiber prop , also note much cleaner aerodynamics on the body, motor mounts ,cameras ,antenas etc ,

2026-08-07_23h20_20.png

690km/h drone note the prop pitch. Both of these drones have no payload and barelly squeeze out such speeds. Following many of these speed attemps they are more often than not seconds away from burning up and many fires before they succed .

Note also these drones sustain max power for about 10 seconds when they are drawing 400amps , by the finger as these run at 42 or 43 volts , that is an output of like 17.2Kw coming out of them tiny motors


2026-08-07_23h32_41.png
 
Last edited:
This is a new one , air to air missile caught fire or failed to come off the rail for the whole motor burn. In any case Fighter on drone loses in UA mount.

2026-08-11_00h05_51.png
 
Sineva said:
The Armenians show off their new AD-08 sam system,
Theres a video showing the set-up of the system,you get to see some interesting little things that the iranians never showed,such as the fold down lcd screens in the cabs of the launchers.
Click to expand...
Interesting each TEL is perfectly able to scan 360 with it's own IRST. It explains their success (especially compared to sector limited and very obvious sevom khordad).
Also, while obviously incapable of hand reload - each TEL has it's own integrated crane.
Contrary to shabby appearance, it's a very thorough system.
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
Using analogue video-cameras with an analogue transceiver would partly counter this as analogue signals degrade under jamming versus digital signals that just crap out altogether.
Click to expand...
Not realy , jammer jams analogue just the same , and its not some super sophisticated tech that is needed , only way around it is AI guided intecept where datalink is not required , but for now wast mayority of drone interceptors are manualy controled so this is a simple defense against most of these.
 
I think you missed the point I was making in regards to an analogue data-link, while noise-jamming effects both digital and analogue links they fail differently. An analogue link degrades while a digital link works fine right up to a noise threshold then it craps out completely, good example of this is comparing analogue TV reception to digital TV reception in heavy rain.​
 
Some learnings from the latest Combined Resolve exercise:

https://www.wsj.com/politics/nation...d-in-an-exercise-ukraines-drones-won-cc3663d5

Alistair MacDonald said:
...

Around 3,500 U.S. personnel, primarily from the 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, took part in the exercise. Their task was to attack a position defended by the Army training-ground’s opposition force, or OPFOR, who were reinforced by Ukrainian troops from the 412th Regiment of Unmanned Systems Forces, or Nemesis, people familiar with the matter said.

...

The Ukrainian drone operators eliminated a U.S. armored brigade in the exercise, according to U.S. officials briefed on the exercise and one participant.

...

Ukrainian drones were doing this so quickly with U.S. vehicles that they had to be sent back into the exercises as new units, or “re-spawned,” to keep the exercise going, a U.S. official briefed on the drill said.

The U.S. reran the training scenario over the two-week engagement. The rotating forces improved their performance, as they became more adept at dispersing and concealing themselves and using electronic warfare, said the Army official. The Ukrainians also switched sides midway through the exercises and helped them use drone technology offensively, which they did effectively, the official said.
Click to expand...
 
joshjosh said:
https://defence-blog.com/us-marines-move-to-arm-amphibious-vehicles-against-drones/

Relying on jamming when autonomous targeting is already here seems... Foolish.
Click to expand...
And fibre optic. Arming with interceptor drones followed by APS seems like a better idea. And maybe having the secondary armament fitting with proximity burst or fragmenting anti-drone rounds as an option, with a targeting system.

And also integrate them with standoff packages like UAVs and UGVs to scout ahead.
 
joshjosh said:
https://defence-blog.com/us-marines-move-to-arm-amphibious-vehicles-against-drones/

Relying on jamming when autonomous targeting is already here seems... Foolish.
Click to expand...
It a temporary fix , AI targeting in Ukraine is not as wide spread as folks think , wast majority of interceptors are FPVs manually guided to the target ,jammers have effect today , in couple of weeks or months they might be worthless and discontinued

Fiberoptic is not practical for interceptors as these fiber optic rolls are large and heavy.
 
Regardless effects of FPV's against tanks, tanks are still relevant "Heavy Armor" in general. Often case tanks is destroyed, crew survives or is injured. In 2020; a British military consultant and commentator, tallied up all the world's Tanks. 73,000 in all. “Of these; 24,000 (1/3rd) belong to Western adversaries and 20,000 were in storage and at least 10,000 have been modernized over the last decade. Without infantry/observation support, tanks fall prey to attacks in urban/village battlefields; as they have even before drones, RPG's, ATGM, even IED and kill squads using homemade bombs, but they are STILL better than lightly armored vehicles.

But without tanks, Infantry fall prey to...everything. A tank is like a winter parka, worn infrequently, but absolutely necessary when the situation demands it. The USMC want's to convert into some airborne mobile unit. This is stupid, because it means they're totally dependent on expensive connectors like rotorcraft for insertions and no armor, they're vulnerable. Even in cities/towns, Tanks are far more durable than Bradleys and vastly more durable than trucks. Falujah proved despite the immobility tanks in urban fields, they were better than other vehicles. Stryker entered the battlefield dire results; until the Army began up-armoring them to defeat RPG's. Mines/IED' the Army resorted heavily fortified MRAP.

Solution is have tether drones, i.e Dog on a leash to determine fore and aft if drones is in vicinity.
 
Matsimus looks at defence against drones in North America.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpPxuIZtEII

(Sorry about the coloured text but I'm trying to find something that shows up best on both black and white backgrounds.)

Mass drone attacks on North American military bases are becoming a genuine strategic threat. NORAD airfields, strategic bomber bases and nuclear submarine facilities were designed to counter conventional aircraft, missiles and sabotage, but small drones create an entirely different defensive problem. North America is not safe from drone attacks to bases or strategic assets and its a key focus for defense that may potentially need more focus and increase in defense. In this video, we examine how coordinated drone raids could disrupt air operations, damage exposed aircraft, close runways and interfere with the infrastructure supporting America’s nuclear deterrent. We also look at the unidentified drone activity around Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Ukraine’s Operation Spiderweb, the vulnerabilities of strategic bomber fleets and the counter-drone systems now being tested by the United States and Canada. The danger is not that one commercial quadcopter can destroy an entire base. The danger comes from mass, precision, surprise and the enormous difference between the cost of the attacking drone and the value of the target behind it.
 
RBU has a too high minimum range.

Interceptor drones would in this case be too expensive IMO. They would have to either be much more agile or substantially faster to intercept in BOT air and underwater AND they would need sensors for both, while the attacking drones could make do with above water (thermal) sensor.

Intercept by helo is tricky as well
- only one or two helos per warship, at most one mission-ready
- already loaded with ASW payload
- helo doesn't have the sensors to use an autocannon with supercavitating projectile against a swift underwater target
- helo could be swarmed and attacked by the missiles/drones and be shot down being target rather than killer
 
Forest Green said:
It's probably interceptor UUVs launched form ship or helo, similar to how it is for aerial drones.
Click to expand...
That would be really expensive.

"Interceptor UUVs" would be like the 6.75" Countermeasure Anti Torpedoes. Not exactly cheap at ~500k each.



lastdingo said:
RBU has a too high minimum range.
Click to expand...
RBU-1000 has a 100m minimum range. If an incoming torpedo explodes that close to you, you're probably taking damage.

And you double-mount an RBU-1000 and RBU-6000 on the same pedestal, 6 barrels in the inner loop for the RBU-1000's RGB-10 rockets, 12 barrels in the outer loop for the RBU-6000's RGB-60 or 90R rockets. 90R rockets have a guided-but-unpowered depth charge, the 90SG.

And yes, I absolutely think the RBUs are a better ship defense than LWT tubes.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom