How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

 

Quote

 

https://www.rtx.com/raytheon/what-we-do/integrated-air-and-missile-defense/coyote

The combat-proven Coyote® kinetic effector is a low-cost, rail-launched missile variant with a boost rocket motor and a turbine engine for high-speed Counter-Unmanned Aircraft System missions.

Drone Defense

Small and expendable, Coyote is able to defeat small to large target Unmanned Aircraft Systems at longer ranges and higher altitudes than similar class effectors. It is able to defeat single drone threats as well as swarms, supported by reduced engagement timelines to defeat multiple targets.

Paired with Raytheon’s Ku-band Radio Frequency Sensor, or KuRFS radar, the systems provide essential detect and defeat capabilities in the defense against UASs. These proven capabilities are crucial components of the U.S. Army’s currently deployed counter-UAS solution, LIDS - the Low, slow, small, unmanned aircraft Integrated Defeat System.

 

 

I don't think I have heard of this system before.

[sburke]

14 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

but the Moskva seems to typify the general approach... minimal modernization.

 

Steve

What?  Minimal modernization? Are you serious?  They upgraded her to a submersible Missle crusier, helo platform, first of her kind!

[panzermartin]

10 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Lancet range is about 40 km so Ukraine could be holding them just out of range. This HIMARS was 50 km behind the front line so that tracks.

I remembered the airport attack incident, maybe there are now lancets with greater range? 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/video-russian-lancet-drone-range-hits-ukrainian-mig-29-jet-2023-9%3famp

 

[The_Capt]

5 hours ago, dan/california said:

 

 

I don't think I have heard of this system before.

Looks like another bloated MID solution to my eyes.  I count 2 tubes on the veh and 4 on the ground system, not sure how that is supposed to counter a “UAS swarm.”  Do they break into sub munitions?  If so, how many?  

The problem with a lot of these C-UAS solutions is that they have been designed for the last war.  iSIL was using small numbers of drones in Iraq so efforts were directed to defeat that threat.  No one predicted UAS employment at the levels in this war.  Even if each Coyote missile could track and down 5 FPVs, at the scales of employment we are seeing one would need hundreds of these systems to begin to provide coverage.  Further, none of this solves for tracking and engaging a UAS flying through trees or a hybrid one that can do both air and ground.

It is a beginning of an arms race that will end up costing billions (if not trillions).  And the MID will gladly spend that money on big expensive solutions…just like they have every other time.

[holoween]

38 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Looks like another bloated MID solution to my eyes.  I count 2 tubes on the veh and 4 on the ground system, not sure how that is supposed to counter a “UAS swarm.”  Do they break into sub munitions?  If so, how many?  

The problem with a lot of these C-UAS solutions is that they have been designed for the last war.  iSIL was using small numbers of drones in Iraq so efforts were directed to defeat that threat.  No one predicted UAS employment at the levels in this war.  Even if each Coyote missile could track and down 5 FPVs, at the scales of employment we are seeing one would need hundreds of these systems to begin to provide coverage.  Further, none of this solves for tracking and engaging a UAS flying through trees or a hybrid one that can do both air and ground.

It is a beginning of an arms race that will end up costing billions (if not trillions).  And the MID will gladly spend that money on big expensive solutions…just like they have every other time.

This seems a really weird thought process form you.

Just because a system isnt perfect we shouldnt bother?

From what ive seen the vast majority of drones are used for scouting to then call in fires either from arty or fpv drones. If that system can shut down the recon drones it already does an invaluable job. Suddenly an attack cloumn doenst get hit several km away from the first defender but only once they are in direct los to them.

And if it forces all drones to hug the treelines to stay alive they suddenly see far less and become far more vulnerable to other weapons.

[panzermartin]

Russians are welcoming our PM One hit got 150-200m close. 

[hcrof]

video of the attack on the landing ship Caesar Kunikov from the deck. Lots of MGs, not a lot of night vision by the looks of things. And it seems that maybe the seababy can take a few small calibre hits (modern inert explosive warhead?)

 

[Beleg85]

Good clip showing how it is to be attacked by these maritime drones, though no sound.

 

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, holoween said:

This seems a really weird thought process form you.

Just because a system isnt perfect we shouldnt bother?

From what ive seen the vast majority of drones are used for scouting to then call in fires either from arty or fpv drones. If that system can shut down the recon drones it already does an invaluable job. Suddenly an attack cloumn doenst get hit several km away from the first defender but only once they are in direct los to them.

And if it forces all drones to hug the treelines to stay alive they suddenly see far less and become far more vulnerable to other weapons.

It appears that you have not kept up on this war.  We are not seeing a "few recon drones spotting" -  which will still be a serious problem with this sort of SHORAD system because LOS (with camera magnification) is much father than these systems can likely reach.  We are starting to see drones being employed en masse on the sorts of scales that these systems cannot deal with. They are not solely being used for recon, but now strike.  Production is reaching massive scales (e.g. reports of 100k per month).

This is not "perfect so we shouldn't bother", it is "expensive and not useful for the environment."  We have gone down this path before and wind up getting into trouble every time - let's send tanks to a COIN fight...anyone?  Massed UAS are not a SHORAD problem, or at least one it can solve.  But that wont stop big business from trying to convince us otherwise.

Here is a scenario - 100 FPVs being driven by 10 crews with repeaters.  These are not even fully autonomous, which we know is coming.  They are EW hardened but we can even accept 50% attrition, so now 50 FPVs are coming in and attacking a position.  These large SHORAD systems now need to track and engage small fast moving UAS capable of treetop and below.  Assuming you have submunitions (which there is no evidence of), and each missile can engage 5 drones effectively - hell give them 100 percent; based on the photos, 5 Coyote systems needed to counter this one attack.  Ok, doesn't sound too bad.  Except for the fact that these FPVs are not working alone.  They are linked into supporting fires.  So as soon as those Coyotes start firing they are going to get lit up and engaged by PGM indirect fires.  But these are trained crews and are scooting, so maybe you only lose half of them, lets say 2 out of 5.

So how many Coyotes do we have in a Bde?  Because the enemy has another 150 FPVs...for todays attack alone.  You basically need to stick one or two in every platoon...fantastic, exactly what Raytheon wants.  And here is the thing...it will not work.  First problem will be clutter.  The enemy will fill the sky with all sorts of junk to toss off detection.  Fire control and coordination will be a nightmare.  And now on a battlefield where everyone is whispering for fear of getting picked up by sound detection, we are going to have dozens of these missiles firing off all over the place.  So we have solved the recon UAS problem by making ourselves visible from freakin space.  And finally sustainment; the enemy is losing ammunition, we are losing platforms.  We cannot keep that up over any period of time.  Like other high end western equipment, we will run out and politicians will never sign off on massive "what if" production capacity.

But let's put this all aside or the moment, this approach will not only be challenged by current reality, it will not solve for what is coming next. UAS are going to get cheaper and more distributed.  They will combine with UGVs so you can lay them like mines and suddenly have them pop up a few meters away.  Drone swarms will be in the hundreds with EFP and launchable sub-munitions of their own.  So while we are investing billions in SHORAD as a solution, we are going to find out it was a half-measure, at best. 

We are so addicted to big, few and expensive platforms, that our solution to their possible extinction on the battlefield is, more big expensive platforms.

So what is the solution?  Cheap and many.  I want a C-UAS weapon that fits under the barrel of a rifle like a GL but has a 1-2 km range and high Pk - so better than a shotgun.  I want UAS, that hunt and kill other UAS.  I want direct fire support on lighter unmanned platforms that do not drink a swimming pools worth of gas per km, and are big and hot. I want infantry that can carry more, move faster and go for days without resupply.   What I do not want are more big, loud expensive platforms to protect my already big, loud and expensive platforms.

Edited March 6 by The_Capt

[Kinophile]

51 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Good clip showing how it is to be attacked by these maritime drones, though no sound.

 

How long before... 

We see HMGs mounted on seababies, raking those CIWS during attacks? 

 

[TheVulture]

1 minute ago, Kinophile said:

How long before... 

We see HMGs mounted on seababies, raking those CIWS during attacks? 

 

Don't waste the weight on the seababy and draw the extra attention.  Instead have separate support surface drones with MGs or AGLs and a good supply of ammo that put down the suppressive fire while the seababies head in

[Kinophile]

9 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

Don't waste the weight on the seababy and draw the extra attention.  Instead have separate support surface drones with MGs or AGLs and a good supply of ammo that put down the suppressive fire while the seababies head in

AGLs could be awkward, depending on sea conditions? But MGs would be useful for sure. Any kind of suppressive fire would help. 

 

Edited March 6 by Kinophile

[Kinophile]

US Army lagging.. 

@The_Capt have you heard much ref CDF integration and TTP of Drones since the war began? 

[Kinophile]

4 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

AGLs could be awkward, depending on sea conditions? But MGs would be useful for sure. Any kind of suppressive fire would help. 

 

Speak of the sea-devil... 

 

[The_Capt]

10 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

Don't waste the weight on the seababy and draw the extra attention.  Instead have separate support surface drones with MGs or AGLs and a good supply of ammo that put down the suppressive fire while the seababies head in

So much of war is about projecting dilemma.  So load up surface unmanned with air self loitering munitions.  Make it a surface/air attack.  Air stuff pops up basically where you see those MGs blasting away, so maybe 500ms out.  CWIS and point defenses will get some but even 1 or 2 getting through will cause chaos - especially if one employs incendiaries.  Add in good ol MGs, decoys etc and you basically have a swarming solution for probably in a few million dollars.  The SK was worth 65 million plus crew and this approach would work on larger ships.  Basically the entry cost for strategic sea denial just plummeted.

[Kinophile]

 

 

[Kinophile]

24 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

So much of war is about projecting dilemma.  So load up surface unmanned with air self loitering munitions.  Make it a surface/air attack.  Air stuff pops up basically where you see those MGs blasting away, so maybe 500ms out.  CWIS and point defenses will get some but even 1 or 2 getting through will cause chaos - especially if one employs incendiaries.  Add in good ol MGs, decoys etc and you basically have a swarming solution for probably in a few million dollars.  The SK was worth 65 million plus crew and this approach would work on larger ships.  Basically the entry cost for strategic sea denial just plummeted.

It seems the GUR /Navy is honing its platforms and tactics on a ladder of ship size. There's still more Roupucha to sink but perhaps the BSF is protecting them well enough with the SK equivalents. But now the Kotov is a man-made reef and the same basic tactics have worked again (immobilize,  then double tap amidships).I

In a couple months I think we'll have a Black Week of the BSF, with its core strength decimated over several days. 

ADD: That chart of the current BSF state shows that at least one ship has been sunk from the majority of classes, but only one class (ropucha) is has had multiple units sunk.

This seems like a pattern, with the Ropuchas as the anomaly that proves the rule/thesis - that Budanov etc are building a library of TTP across the entire BSF classes. This doesn't mean they'll go for a large scale strike but that every class will have been studied, attacked and the results applied to the next attack, so that the GUR can be ready to attack any ship class that presents an opportunity. 

TLDR: It's possible that these attacks are not so much shaping or opportunistic assaults as they are combat studies of the various classes and their crews. 

Edited March 6 by Kinophile

[Kinophile]

@Haiduk, @Kraftand et al

Is this really a UKR Navy (VMS) effort? It's mostly GUR, right?

Is the VMS working anything on the surface? 

Edited March 6 by Kinophile

[Kinophile]

Omnomnomnom the war eats it's children...

 

[holoween]

delete please accidentialy hit post

 

Edited March 6 by holoween
delete please accidential post

[The_Capt]

32 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

US Army lagging.. 

@The_Capt have you heard much ref CDF integration and TTP of Drones since the war began? 

 

"Drones Today

The ongoing war in Ukraine showcases small drones as key tools for ground combat in the modern era. The technology behind them will continue to improve, as machine guns did, by becoming more reliable, portable, and tactically useful. Ukraine and Russia are desperate for better and more drones to equip their forces. This year, the Ukrainian government aims to produce one million small drones for military use, and its partners are focusing on supplying thousands more. As much as 50 percent of Russia’s modern T-90 tank combat losses are attributed to small first-person-view drones. Over 3,000 verified drone strikes occurred along the front line in January 2024. At the same time, Russian forces are building and using drones with equal zeal. In at least one case, a bakery was converted to 3D printing drones, and public schools are teaching classes on drone flying along with other martial topics. Small drones are becoming the defining technology of the conflict."

That is just nuts.  Excellent article.

As to western military integration, let's just say it has been "spotty".  We are all watching this war, but just like on this forum at times, we are all seeing what we want to see and not necessarily what is actually happening.  Before this war in the Canadian military UAS programs were a hot mess.  The RCAF still does not have an unmanned platform within its fleets.  They are getting one, but in typical fashion it will be some large Strategic/operational beast.  This is not all bad as we need these too, but the smaller stuff, Class 2 and below, are all being handled internally by each service.  This has led to the capability spinning off in a bunch of directions.  So as to training and force development, it is kinda all over the map right now and changing daily.  No one expected to see naval drones swarming a patrol ship that looks a lot like our AOPS. No one could have imagined "1 million" FPVs who appear to be doing most of the tank killing back in March of '22 - hell my money was on ATGMs, like Javelin, which definitely worked but were not even close to becoming the major shocker.

We have major issues with deconfliction, training standards, training clearances, frequency management - ranges and training areas are not set up for FPV gunnery - I am not even sure what that looks like.  Simulators are our best bet, but we will spend 5-10 years buying some massively bloated system or some app-garbage built by some "diversity group" (see: ArriveCAN app).  All this is of course also held up by procurement friction.  Some organizations are out in front - but they shall remain unnamed - however even they are struggling at times.  We definitely do not have doctrine or established tactics.  Frankly I do not even know where to start on Unmanned Battlefield Management, I mean what do the supply lines even look like?  Training, C2 and effective employment are all behind the curve. 

Our reactions and culture are not competitive either.  With few exceptions, I have largely heard of the "drone problem" as just that, a problem to be managed so we can get our current "stuff" to work like it used to.  Few are pointing at the competitive opportunities here.

And all the while the Chinese are pushing ahead:   https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/List/ORIGIN_china--people-s-republic-of-d6ee02&DOM_air-e61af2&DOM_aircraft-42b8bd&DOM_unmanned-aerial-vehicles--uavs--bc8e46

 https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/List/ORIGIN_china--people-s-republic-of-d6ee02&DOM_land-f5e1db&DOM_infantry-vehicles-0a6516&DOM_unmanned-ground-vehicles--ugv--453001

It is one of my final departing shots - we have seen this coming for years and largely ignored it.  We either get with the program or we risk losing the few military options we have left.

 

Edited March 6 by The_Capt

[Anthony P.]

49 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

Don't waste the weight on the seababy and draw the extra attention.  Instead have separate support surface drones with MGs or AGLs and a good supply of ammo that put down the suppressive fire while the seababies head in

Thought did strike me the other day, I wonder what the potential is for some kind of Claymore sea drones to accompany them, with the mine tilted some degrees upwards to target crewmen shooting at the kamikaze drones? Think a super sized Claymore mine, likely with larger munitions and charge to reach further (?) and a tilt sensor which ensures that it only detonates when fairly level so the shrapnel doesn't go flying way above the ship or into the sea. I can't imagine that anyone would be too happy standing around on exposed walkways once word gets around that nautical BigMac Claymore drones have become a thing.

I guess much depends on how effective seamen toting AKs actually are for point defence. Might be a lot of work if the biggest threat they pose is hitting the FLIR camera moments before impact.

[The_Capt]

9 minutes ago, Anthony P. said:

Thought did strike me the other day, I wonder what the potential is for some kind of Claymore sea drones to accompany them, with the mine tilted some degrees upwards to target crewmen shooting at the kamikaze drones? Think a super sized Claymore mine, likely with larger munitions and charge to reach further (?) and a tilt sensor which ensures that it only detonates when fairly level so the shrapnel doesn't go flying way above the ship or into the sea. I can't imagine that anyone would be too happy standing around on exposed walkways once word gets around that nautical BigMac Claymore drones have become a thing.

I guess much depends on how effective seamen toting AKs actually are for point defence. Might be a lot of work if the biggest threat they pose is hitting the FLIR camera moments before impact.

Kinda modern version of grape shot.  I like where the idea is going but claymores are pretty short range (around 100ms).  The balls tend to give up energy pretty quickly.  The bigger the explosives, the bigger the ball bearing, which actually makes range issues worse.  And airburst frag mortar or somesuch would also be an idea.

I am a big fan of incendiaries at sea - it hits naval pers deeply in their psyche and has for centuries. 

The fact that those surface drones can get within small arms range is already a sign of a local defence failure on the part of the Russian ship.

[panzermartin]

If I were russian I would invest in fast, small patrol tank/boats with shilka quad 23mm turrets that would hunt in front of the big ships. Highly agile that would be impossible to hit with naval drones. 

For equipment, maybe radar, maybe night vision, definetly a big spotlight. 

An embarrassment for the BSF that technology a little better than Somali pirate boats can penetrate their defenses and get them to the bottom. 

[Anthony P.]

5 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I like where the idea is going but claymores are pretty short range (around 100ms).  The balls tend to give up energy pretty quickly.

Granted, that's why I speculated about if range could be increased. But then again, if the point is a suicide drone supporting kamikaze drones, perhaps getting close before detonating it wouldn't be much of an issue? Especially when the point is scaring away seamen using small arms (I can't imagine that handheld weapons on a swaying ship at night without even basic night vision sights are too accurate beyond a hundred meters or so). And add to that the potential to supersize the "Sea Claymore" by maybe a factor of 10 since it doesn't have to be carried around by someone or hidden.

But like you say, the fact (based on media released by the Ukrainian MoD) that they're regularly getting within small arms range/that this seems to be a significant part of the Russian navy's point defence system could very much indicate that "Yuri with an RPK" is just a measure of desperation which isn't even worth spending time and money countering in the first place.