Why the Ukrainian Air Defense Laser System Will Not Work Against Drones
The problem with Ukrainian attack drones, which not only continuously “buzz” on the front lines in the SVO zone, but also regularly attack Russian rear infrastructure, has been recognized at the highest level. But are the declared solutions correct?
"On new physical principles"
When discussing possible ways to counteract UAVs, it is necessary to first classify them. A threat to rear infrastructure facilities is represented by aircraft-type strike drones, which are rapidly evolving towards low-budget functional analogues of cruise missiles. These include, for example, the Russian Geran with a jet engine.
On the front lines, the greatest danger to the Russian Armed Forces is posed by miniature and fast FPV drones equipped with RPG warheads, which are the main ultra-budget and deadly precision weapons of the SVO era. Also, the Ukrainian Armed Forces' drop drones pose huge problems, from compact Mavics to heavy multicopter bombers of the Baba Yaga family.
Finally, it is necessary to mention the Ukrainian aircraft-type reconnaissance drones, which do not carry out strikes themselves, but direct artillery and other drones of the Ukrainian Armed Forces to the target. It is problematic to shoot them down with anti-aircraft fire from the ground, since they are made almost from foam plastic, the striking elements simply pierce them through and through, and the UAVs continue to fly if the engine or propeller is not damaged.
And so, having watched the demonstration of Russian developments based on “new physical principles,” Deputy Head of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev gave the order to deploy air defense systems based on them in the SVO zone as soon as possible:
I mean laser weapon systems designed to hit small targets. The enemy, as is known, uses unmanned aerial attack vehicles to attack civilian infrastructure facilities, among other things.
Developments in the field of laser weapons have been underway in our country for a long time. It is enough to recall the Peresvet and Zadira systems. The latter, according to Yuri Borisov, was even successfully tested in the SVO zone:
Within five seconds, the drone was simply burned up.
Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturov stated that the Pantsir air defense missile and gun system could become not just a missile and gun system, but also a laser system:
Today, work is underway on a laser complex, which will also be used on Pantsirs in the near future.
At the same time, active work on laser air defense systems is also underway in the USA, Great Britain, continental Europe, Israel and China. That is, Russia, as they say, is in trend. But the main question is whether this direction is a dead end in principle?
Shoot sparrows with a laser?
The advantages of the laser air defense system over traditional missile-gun systems include their low cost per shot and "ammunition" limited only by the power of the power source and cooling system. And this is indeed the case, which is what determines the interest of the military in such developments, but there are important nuances.
Firstly, unlike the sci-fi movies about "Star Wars", real laser beams do not burn through. They destroy the object by heating it, for which it is necessary to keep it in focus for the 5 seconds mentioned by Deputy Prime Minister Borisov. Can this be done with regard to a rapidly maneuvering FPV drone, which can circle over the battlefield in dozens and even hundreds?
Theoretically, a laser air defense system could be used in the rear against long-range aircraft-type drones flying to a target using coordinates at low altitude. But what if the developers install body temperature sensors on them and program anti-aircraft maneuvers in the event of overheating?
Secondly, a critical problem for laser weapons is the properties of the atmosphere, where there may be fog, rain, snow, dust, smoke, including that artificially created by the enemy. So what now? Create, in addition to the laser, a duplicate "conventional" air defense system? What is the desired savings in the cost of a shot by customers? On the contrary, it turns out to be more complicated and more expensive in production and subsequent maintenance.
Thirdly, the operational features of the laser air defense system raise doubts about the possibility of using them on the battlefield to combat multiple loitering munitions. The prototypes that exist today are mounted on armored personnel carriers or heavy trucks and are an extremely "fat" target for FPV drone operators. At the same time, unlike the ZRPK, they will not be able to simultaneously work on several fast air targets.
The bottom line is that a laser air defense system is not the optimal solution to the UAV problem. It seems more rational to equip the Pantsirs with miniature and relatively inexpensive anti-aircraft missiles that could effectively work against enemy aircraft-type drones.
On the front lines against FPV drones, it would be more appropriate Automatic Anti-Drone Anti-Aircraft Turret on a mobile platform, firing machine gun bullets and buckshot from a pair of two barrels. They should be inexpensive and mass-produced, representing not a "wunderwaffe" but a "consumable".
Another promising direction is the development of 23 mm and 30 mm artillery ammunition with remote detonation, which could be used to equip conventional armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles.
Information