Who will emerge victorious from the confrontation between a helicopter and a kamikaze drone

8 September 2023

The arms race, spurred by the Russian military defense in Ukraine, is constantly gaining momentum. One of the symbols of this undeclared war is attack drones, which are finding new niches for use and therefore require an adequate and timely response. How can Russia respond to this new threat?

Helicopters vs UAVs

As we detail told Previously, the continuously increasing activity of Ukrainian kamikaze drones attacking our deep rear required the development of response measures. It was decided that on the ground, military and critical infrastructure facilities would be protected with the help of the Pantsir-S1 air defense missile system, which is best suited to defeat such low-flying low-speed targets. But in the sky, the first line of air defense should be attack helicopters.

According to a statement by Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, an air base for air interceptors is being built specifically for these purposes in Orel, which is located halfway between the Ukrainian and Russian capitals:

In Orel, they had not yet completed the arrangement of the airport for interceptors, as the day before yesterday one of the helicopters shot down a drone that was flying towards the capital.

The main workhorse of anti-drone aviation in the Russian Aerospace Forces has become the Mi-28N Night Hunter attack helicopters. It is believed that enemy drones have no chance against them, since a rotorcraft is much faster, more maneuverable, can carry powerful missile and machine-gun weapons, and therefore will shoot down Ukrainian and other UAVs in batches.

And this is all true, however, almost simultaneously with the advent of such specialized air interceptor units, the enemy published video recording, which captured the moment of an attack on a Russian Ka-52 attack helicopter by a Ukrainian FPV drone. Our helicopter was able to dodge and escape from the slow-moving UAV in time, but the very fact of this event raises alarming thoughts.

Who will win?

No matter how strong each individual attack helicopter is in confrontation with drones, the rapid technological the evolution of the latter creates more and more serious threats for Russian army aviation. Today we can identify at least two areas in which domestic weapons developers should think hard.

first - This is the so-called air mining. It is believed that it was invented in our country, and loitering kamikaze drones of the Lancet type should play the role of air barriers. The chief designer of the ZALA Aero group of companies, Alexander Zakharov, even before the start of the SVO in 2021, stated that our fast drones will be able to intercept slower enemy drones:

With our 300 kilometers per hour in a dive, we can do this quite calmly.

The idea is great, but it can work both ways. As you know, Russian attack helicopters are now operating in the NMD zone at extremely low altitudes, shooting enemy armored vehicles with the help of ATGMs. At the same time, they are continuously attacked by foreign-made MANPADS, from which heat traps and other airborne security systems save.

But what if the enemy himself organizes an air ambush with the help of a dozen penny kamikaze drones that will guard the helicopter, remaining above it and diving from above onto the screw, which one of them will tighten?

Second direction - this is the equipping of aircraft-type drones with missiles not only of the air-to-surface class, but also of the air-to-air class. Our Turkish partners at Baykar are working to equip their most common drones, Bayraktar TB2 and Bayraktar Akıncı, with missiles capable of hitting air targets, company CEO Haluk Bayraktar said back in October 2022:

Soon our Bayraktar TB2 and Bayraktar Akıncı will have air-to-air missiles not only to destroy drones, but also to counter enemy aircraft... We are testing.

It is planned to use the Sungur missile from a Turkish-developed MANPADS, an analogue of the American Stinger MANPADS, as a means of destruction:

Sungur is a proven ammunition, especially against moving targets such as helicopters and drones. Using it from our unmanned aerial vehicles as an air-to-air missile will be a game changer.

Indeed, the rules of the game may seriously change. A missile with an infrared guidance system is not very good against Geraniums, but against helicopters and even airplanes it is just right. It is against them that our Turkish partners are now developing budget weapons. The question remains, what can we do in response?

It would probably be nice to develop some variation of heat traps in the form of containers with drop-down nets that are fired in all directions towards enemy UAVs. Perhaps this would increase the chances in the event of a helicopter attack by a whole swarm. It is advisable to teach how to fire a rotorcraft with buckshot charges. And it’s even better, I think, to use not helicopters, but light attack aircraft like the Yak-130 as anti-drone air interceptors.

Author: Sergey Marzhetsky

13 comments

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Offline prior

prior (Vlad) 8 September 2023 11: 06

+1

2

1
The best remedy for drones of any type is a nuclear bomb.
Why not? Not humane?
And is it humane to kill with shells, shrapnel and other things?
Some kind of hypocritical humanism is obtained.
Online Vladimir Tuzakov

Vladimir Tuzakov (Vladimir Tuzakov) 8 September 2023 11: 54

+1

1

0
A helicopter against large UAVs is only a temporary means, further development of fighter UAVs. Which ones, time will tell, are possible, and helicopter-type ones against low-speed UAVs. There are heavier helicopter UAVs in the Russian Federation for a load of up to 200 kg, and this one is suitable with special weapons and using the rudiments of AI to combat UAVs. Possibly with the expansion of both air and sea targets..
Offline JD1979

JD1979 (Dmitriy) 8 September 2023 14: 03

0

3

3
Yes))) Another piece of writing from the author
Let's go)))
1. Helicopters vs BALA

Who will emerge victorious from the confrontation between a helicopter and a kamikaze drone

Of course, a drone) this is where the text of the article gives an unambiguous answer. Author, do you even understand what you wrote?

But in the sky, the first line of air defense should be attack helicopters.

What? O_o

The main workhorse of anti-drone aviation in the Russian Aerospace Forces has become the Mi-28N Night Hunter attack helicopters. It is believed that enemy drones have no chance against them, since a rotorcraft is much faster, more maneuverable, can carry powerful missile and machine-gun weapons, and therefore will shoot down Ukrainian and other UAVs in batches.

He will turn the money into smoke in batches. And its range of “powerful” weapons is 99% useless against UAVs. The only weapon that can adequately work against a UAV, and even a fairly large one, is a cannon, and even then, in single-fire mode))) Well, and hanging containers with machine guns or cannons. All. And since we don’t have any shells in the PP, the consumption will be high and about packs of UAVs... it’s not good to lie)))
2. Who wins?

The first is the so-called air mining.

Will only work against helicopters. Ambushes on routes can be quite effective. Against UAVs, this is unscience fiction. As a system, this is not feasible in Russia. China, maybe even then, not in the coming years.

The second direction is equipping aircraft-type drones with not only air-to-surface, but also air-to-air missiles.

Yes, helicopters are flying)) IKSGN works well against the Mi-28NM, it has been tested more than once, and if stingers appear on the UAV, then the vaunted night hunter will sit on the ground)) And to shoot down the UAV at a distance of 4-5 km, our helicopters there is nothing. You can try with an ATGM, but it’s not an option, you have to hang, but for MANPADS it’s just easy))

It would probably be nice to develop some variation of heat traps in the form of containers with drop-down nets that are fired in all directions towards enemy UAVs. Perhaps this would increase the chances in the event of a helicopter attack by a whole swarm. It is advisable to teach how to fire a rotorcraft with buckshot charges. And it’s even better, I think, to use not helicopters, but light attack aircraft like the Yak-130 as anti-drone air interceptors.

Well, the classic epic ending in its absurdity))) networks, shrapnel))) and the Yak-130 cherry))) with a target search system - the eyes of pilots at a speed of 500-600 km/h))) and the only means of destruction - a 30mm cannon , yeah))

The author burns with napalm as usual)))

So we have the UAV problem. We need to figure out something to protect against them. Moreover, decide how to protect yourself from ALREADY EXISTING UAVs but also future ones. First, we need to understand what we can protect ourselves from and what we either cannot protect ourselves from or only conditionally.

https://docs.geoscan.aero/ru/master/database/const-module/classification/classification.html

And our main problems are precisely with small and medium-sized UAVs flying at low and ultra-low altitudes, because: it is difficult to detect due to the flight profile and the materials from which the UAVs are made. Even with the dinosaurs of the Soviet era, the Tu-141, which is the size of a fighter jet and made of metal, modernized by the Ukrainians for low-altitude flight, had problems with detection and interception - they were actually shot down over the target. And if there had been a raid of 10 cars with good stuffing, we could have forgotten about Engels.

Those. count on CONSTANTLY intercepting UAVs with a low-altitude flight profile, 9 out of 10 of which are detected on approach to the target using helicopters... maybe a person who is not friendly with logic. For the interception system to work (it must work 24/7 if anything), the helicopter must be in the air constantly))) which is physically impossible, even in shifts)) firstly, we DO NOT have such a number of helicopters to organize a global defense system, but to attract Mi- 28 and Ka-52, these are not even nails and a microscope, they are a cockroach and a nuclear landmine, and secondly, where they can really be used is the protection of their own airfield. And only if the UAV is detected in advance. Yes, if a UAV flies from Ukraine to the Moscow area and if it was detected hundreds of kilometers away, then the helicopter can be lifted and intercepted and even necessary, but there are too many IFs for the stable operation of the interception system, don’t you think? And the cost of operating such a system is far from cheap if you imagine its organization on a national scale. This is exactly the system we need.

I don’t admit that any part of the UAV interception system could be helicopters (as air defense systems represent different classes of complexes), but these should not be strikers, they are too expensive, and there should be quite a lot of helicopters, cheap in themselves and cheap to operate, and since they will perform a specific task, the weapons must be appropriate. Accordingly, they do not overlap with the strike forces either in terms of missions or weapons, and they cannot be transferred back and forth, here we storm, here we shoot down. And we do not have helicopters of this class and will not have them in the foreseeable future. Everyone knows who to thank. And in order not to be unfounded, IMHO, “birds” a la “Little Bird” or Ka-226 with OLS and machine guns or the smallest rackets like MANPADS or smaller ones guided by a laser would be best suited here to intercept small targets in the form of copters or kamikazes . Those that can and will in the future carry V-V missiles are best left to ground-based means. Perhaps aircraft such as Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano with OLS would play the role of interceptors well. They are cheaper in terms of flight hours than the existing Mi and Ka and are more versatile in general. But we don’t have them at all as a class.

And what do we end up with? Yes, there’s almost nothing to organize an effective system for protecting against UAV attacks, both massive and single (4 “corpses” Il-76 and Tu-22M3 won’t let you lie). There is a Shell, and that’s basically it. There are not even announcements of such a system and possible ways of organizing it, but it was needed and needed yesterday. And there are only 2 ways to organize it: either make a continuous barrier along the entire border or protect important objects. We won’t be able to close the entire border financially and it won’t save us from launching drones from Russian territory by the same DRGs. Means - Protection of objects. Protection works 24/7 in any weather and is quite cheap to operate both in standby mode and in fire mode. And then all the helicopters and planes are past the ticket office. There are only ground-based systems that can really thresh small things in batches. Such systems must be modular, both mobile and with the possibility of permanent installation. And there is only one way out. Detection equipment should be placed on 30-40m towers in the form of a multispectral turret OLS, preferably with a small-sized radar, even the one found on the T-14 according to the technical characteristics is enough, and combat modules that can be placed both on semi-trailers and permanently based on containers . Modules or rifle 12,5 - 30mm, if guns, then shells with PP. It is advisable to dilute this BM with a laser system, which will be the cheapest and most effective against small copters. Well, electronic warfare to the heap. There is no point in adding missiles; presence at important Pantsir facilities will suffice. The number of towers and modules is selected depending on the importance and size of the object being covered. Something like this.

PS: Maybe the author will try to write an article as he sees the organization of the SYSTEM, which can be deployed within the COUNTRY, which will complement the classic air defense without significant duplication and what components, existing or those that should be created to complete the task, it should, in his opinion, consist. Helicopter vs. UAV, Helicopter vs. ATGM, etc. these are private isolated cases of inappropriate use and nothing more.
1. Offline Beidodir
  
  Beidodir (Beidodir) 8 September 2023 15: 03
  
  -1
  
  1
  
  2
  
  Of course, a drone) this is where the text of the article gives an unambiguous answer. Author, do you even understand what you wrote?
  
  What are you talking about?
  
  He will turn the money into smoke in batches. And its range of “powerful” weapons is 99% useless against UAVs. The only weapon that can adequately work against a UAV, and even a fairly large one, is a cannon, and even then, in single-fire mode))) Well, and hanging containers with machine guns or cannons. All. And since we don’t have any shells in the PP, the consumption will be high and about packs of UAVs... it’s not good to lie)))
  
  Hm. I wonder what exactly is the lie? There the article says:
  
  It is believed that enemy drones have no chance against them, since a rotorcraft is much faster, more maneuverable, can carry powerful missile and machine-gun weapons, and therefore will shoot down Ukrainian and other UAVs in batches.
  
  Is the author lying? Or those who think so and rely on helicopters?
  
  Will only work against helicopters. Ambushes on routes can be quite effective. Against UAVs, this is unscience fiction. As a system, this is not feasible in Russia. China, maybe even then, not in the coming years.
  
  That is, the writing is not so stupid? Why don't we clown around?
  
  Yes, helicopters are flying)) IKSGN works well against the Mi-28NM, it has been tested more than once, and if stingers appear on the UAV, then the vaunted night hunter will sit on the ground)) And to shoot down the UAV at a distance of 4-5 km, our helicopters there is nothing. You can try with an ATGM, but it’s not an option, you have to hang, but for MANPADS it’s just easy))
  
  Again, not stupidity? What's wrong with the author?
  
  Well, the classic epic ending in its absurdity))) networks, shrapnel))) and the Yak-130 cherry))) with a target search system - the eyes of pilots at a speed of 500-600 km/h))) and the only means of destruction - a 30mm cannon , yeah)) The author burns with napalm as usual)))
  
  So Yaki can be modernized
  1. Offline JD1979
    
    JD1979 (Dmitriy) 8 September 2023 22: 56
    
    +1
    
    2
    
    1
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    What are you talking about?
    
    Why are you clowning around?))) No, I’m just saying once again that the author doesn’t understand what he wants to write about and can’t decide.) It’s like our helicopters against their drones in one sentence put the latter in batches, but don’t leave behind the drones chances for helicopters) and all this is diluted with calls to develop some kind of protection against drones - meshes, shrapnel...
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    Hm. I wonder what exactly is the lie? There the article says:
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    Is the author lying? Or those who think so and rely on helicopters?
    
    In that it is wishful thinking.))) Helicopters began to be used to intercept low-speed targets in the form of light single-engine aircraft even after the Rust incident. Because it suddenly turned out that classic fighter-interceptors, due to their enormous speed, cannot work against such targets, the pilot simply does not have time to do anything. And the target must not only be shot down, it must preferably be escorted and landed. And helicopters began to be used precisely because of their LOW speed, which allowed the pilot to properly identify the target, since shooting down civilian targets was still fraught with the risk of being forced to land. Now we have moved on to drones, simply because in all these decades NOTHING else has been done. Powerful missile weapons? What is this?)) Anti-tank gun on a copter?))) Well, it’s possible if the pilots can keep the target in sight. All that remains is the cannon and maybe, if of course there are containers available, with machine guns or cannons. And the question is, can a helicopter’s avionics capture and release the command control to a small copter or “airplane,” or will it have to be shot by eye? Well, only the lazy didn’t talk about the accuracy of the gun on the Mi-28NM. And from all this - where are the packs of UAVs? One or two bookmakers would be enough. In general, this question will need to be posed to Kirill, let him ask his pilot friends.
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    That is, the writing is not so stupid? Why don't we clown around?
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    Again, not stupidity? What's wrong with the author?
    
    So no one writes 100% stupidity, not even you.
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    So Yaki can be modernized
    
    Although no, I got excited)) this is 100% stupidity.
    1. The comment was deleted.
2. Offline Beidodir
  
  Beidodir (Beidodir) 8 September 2023 15: 06
  
  0
  
  1
  
  1
  
  PS: Maybe the author will try to write an article on how he sees the organization of a SYSTEM that can be deployed within the COUNTRY, which will complement classical air defense without significant duplication and what components, existing or those that should be created to complete the task, it should, in his opinion, consist of. Because articles like: “PvP or z a s a l” are already tired of reading. Helicopter vs. UAV, Helicopter vs. ATGM, etc. These are isolated isolated cases of misuse and nothing more.
  
  Cool. That is, the author faces claims for the way the air defense system was organized by the Ministry of Defense. Who burns with napalm here, the author or you?
  
  So we have the UAV problem. We need to figure out something to protect against them. Moreover, decide how to protect yourself from ALREADY EXISTING UAVs but also future ones. First, we need to understand what we can protect ourselves from and what we either cannot protect ourselves from or only conditionally.
  
  Write to Shoigu He won't be able to do it without your advice.
  1. Online Vladimir Tuzakov
    
    Vladimir Tuzakov (Vladimir Tuzakov) 8 September 2023 21: 07
    
    0
    
    0
    
    0
    
    In this controversy, two factors can be distinguished, the first is the detection of a UAV, the second is the destruction of the detected UAV. According to the cost-effectiveness system, a network of stationary balloons seems to be looming for detection on its territory. For destruction, on-duty means are needed for the use of weapons, from loitering UAVs with weapons on board, to interceptors performed by UAVs (possibly the future Su-75). To date, the available funds have not been created for such purposes, which means that they are not effective. The fight against UAVs is becoming a priority, Stalinist diligence is not expected, which means that for a long time there will not be sufficient means to counteract the ever-expanding capabilities of enemy UAVs and not only.
    1. Offline vap
      
      vap (vap) 9 September 2023 23: 24
      
      0
      
      0
      
      0
      
      According to the cost-effectiveness system, it seems that a network of stationary balloons is emerging for detection on its territory.
      
      By system "cost-effectiveness of detection" it's worth starting with specific type of radar.!
      Because, to restore the radar detection field at low altitudes for small targets (drones), radar posts will require “darkness” - regardless of the form of deployment (balloon radars, if they can reduce the total number of radar posts, it will be very insignificant! ).
      Therefore, the choice of the type of detection radar is the main issue in constructing the SYSTEM.
      We don’t need to formulate technical specifications for radars - we take the best ready-made ones along the way!
      There is no need to go to fortune tellers, there are no options - this is a radar from the Pantsir air defense system (the detection range of small-sized drones is the same as it should be for effective destruction - probably about 15 km)
      Will this detection range of drones increase when the air defense system is lifted on a balloon?
      NO, gentlemen, dreamers - IT WILL NOT INCREASE!
      Because the curvature of the earth “obscures targets” at ranges greater than 12 miles (20 km).
      Here's a helicopter (at a range of 40 km) when the radar is raised - it will detect it! And the drone - alas NO!.
      
      In the Soviet Union, radar detection fields at low altitudes (100m) for small targets had already been deployed in certain important directions. But the RTV troops didn’t even try to play with the romance of “aeronautics” of 100 years ago... And they don’t advise you!
  2. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
3. The comment was deleted.
Offline Owl

Owl (Philip) 8 September 2023 21: 41

0

0

0
They are not competitors, they complement each other.
Offline vlad127490

vlad127490 (Vlad Gor) 9 September 2023 20: 35

0

1

1
There is no point in discussing by what means the UAV will be destroyed if there is no detection and tracking system.
How to detect existing and future UAVs? Conditions.
The detection system must be cheap. The industry of the Russian Federation can produce products right now, i.e. I have everything. The product must be installed on site simply and quickly. Let's look - Visibility range from altitude: the UAV flies at an altitude of 10 (20) meters.
Locator height - 50 m; UAV visibility range - 39 (44) km.
Locator height - 100 m; UAV visibility range - 50 (55) km.
It is necessary to install towers on which locators will be located (SAR system).
As a tower, you need to take power line supports. For example, the highest power transmission line tower with a height of 197 m is located in the city of Balakovo.
What did you get? 20 towers installed along the perimeter, 50 m high, cover 800 km.
From my point of view, this is the cheapest and fastest option for solving the problem of UAV detection.
Offline ksa

ksa 9 September 2023 22: 24

0

0

0
The problem with drones is the problem of detecting them. Why are there interceptors here? You can get by with a slingshot. Well, if the drones are detected and accompanied.
I could be wrong, I'm not a military man:
1- We have Penicillin, which accurately determines the coordinates of the gun by the sound of the shot. But he cannot hear the sound of the drone at a distance of 1 km. He doesn't hear it on the ground where the crickets are playing. Let's raise the Penicillin analogue to a height of 1 km, where there are no crickets. Probably, under these conditions, the Penicillin analogue will be able to detect the approach of a drone at a distance of several kilometers.
2 - You can raise the Penicillin analog using an airship, a balloon, or balloons. All these devices do not have to be stationary. They are easy to hit (unless they are balloons). At night, these objects must move (500 meters is enough).
3 - Well, the destruction of the drones itself should be carried out by anti-aircraft guns with automatic guidance according to three-dimensional coordinates, which (coordinates) are transmitted to them in real time from the sky. However, here we need shells that would automatically explode at a given height. The problem of creating such projectiles does not seem to me as insoluble as landing people on Mars.
Offline Victor Surname

Victor Surname (Victor Surname) 10 September 2023 08: 34

0

0

0
The best way is to destroy border crossings, bridges, tunnels and prevent the delivery of weapons to Ukraine, to imprison our ministers of traders who are connected with Ukraine
Offline anyname

anyname (any name) 17 September 2023 11: 28

0

0

0
It is too expensive to use helicopters and jets to fight drones. Perhaps a piston fighter would have worked better. With these kamikaze drones, landing helicopters near the front lose their meaning. Try hanging for a couple of minutes. Fortunately, there are few such helicopters in Russia, but there are a lot of them in the West.