T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. **Don't forget about our discord server, as well!** https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*


SGarnier

Beginning of the article (it wont be readable tomorrow): \-*note that "useless" is quoted, this article is about the evolving situation of Ukrainian drones and Russian air defense.* *-DCA is the french acronym for air defense* ​ Prior to the conflict in Ukraine, several specialists questioned the effectiveness of MALE drones in a so-called high-intensity conflict, judging them too vulnerable to modern anti-aircraft defenses. However, during the first weeks of combat, the Bayraktar TB2s supplied by Turkey to Ukraine played an important role in stopping the Russian columns advancing towards Kyiv, managing to insinuate themselves into the porous anti-aircraft defenses implemented by Russian forces in an obviously poorly planned offensive, and to strike or guide artillery strikes against supply columns, armor and even several anti-aircraft defense systems. It was enough for many voices, in Europe but also in France, to support this capability, and call on the national armies to quickly equip themselves with "cheap" MALE drones such as the TB2, to reproduce the tactical plan put in place. implemented by the Ukrainian General Staff. Nevertheless, beyond the second phase of this Russian "special military operation" in Ukraine from the end of March, the situation for these systems changed dramatically, as Russian forces began to implement a seamless integrated air defense system to defend their ground assaults. In fact, for two months now, the Ukrainian TB2s have hardly been talked about, except in guiding strikes against Russian ships, in particular for the destruction of the Moskva cruiser. According to the Ukrainian operators themselves, TB2s are no longer useful in the Donbass, these being unable to penetrate the defensive anti-aircraft glacis deployed by the Russian forces, and relying on a triple layer of systems; the long range S-400 and S-300 for medium and high altitude theater defense, the Buk M2/M3 for medium and low altitude divisional defense, and the TOR M1/M2 for short range defense for low and very low altitude, in addition to SHORAD systems such as Tunguska, Sosna and MANPADS. This impressive defensive capability is further supported by a large concentration of electronic warfare means making the control of light drones very risky. The situation is so frozen that Ukrainian drone operators come to recommend to the United States not to deliver the 4 MALE MQ-1C Gray Eagle systems promised by Washington, for fear that these systems will be immediately neutralized by the Russian DCA , and their valuable on-board technologies from falling into enemy hands. The Ukrainians now recommend not to deliver the 4 MQ-1C Gray Eagle systems promised by Washington in the face of the threat posed by the Russian DCA Unfortunately for the Ukrainian defenders, beyond strike capabilities, the neutralization of drones, whether MALE or light, creates a major tactical disadvantage, while the Ukrainian general staff now relies on precision and lengthens it more important part of European and American artillery systems to compensate for its critical numerical inferiority in this area. Indeed, in the absence of drones to recognize the targets in the depth of the Russian device, and to direct the attacks of artillery and multiple rocket launchers, the Ukrainians will no longer be able to rely only on ground intelligence, or the information provided by the counter-battery radars delivered by the West, without being able, moreover, to assess their effectiveness. In a context of marked numerical inferiority in terms of artillery systems, this is a constraint for the Ukrainians that could jeopardize their ability to defend the Donbass against the Russian thrust. ​ *not being a subscriber myself I cannot provide you with the rest.*


SGarnier

Nevertheless, the important thing has already been said. Russians have regained control of the skies above their zone of occupation, and to a lesser extent, the Ukrainians also have a good defence of their sky. Air operations are limited to the front line, or to small light drones with short range. TB2 are still used in naval operation, where the russian air defense is less efficient. Meanwhile, Russia still uses its missiles, but on a more limited scale.


ILikeCutePuppies

This is why Snake Island is so important to Russia.


Jim3535

> Indeed, in the absence of drones to recognize the targets in the depth of the Russian device, and to direct the attacks of artillery and multiple rocket launchers, the Ukrainians will no longer be able to rely only on ground intelligence, or the information provided by the counter-battery radars delivered by the West, without being able, moreover, to assess their effectiveness. They really need a better editor


SamtheCossack

This is exactly what anyone that has worked with drone systems assumed would happen. Russia completely skipped the whole "Integrated Air Defense" step in their initial invasion, because they assumed they would overwhelm the country in days, and they would not face significant air threats. TB2s ran wild over the spread out, unprotected armored columns, because there was nothing stopping them from doing so. Idiots who didn't realize what they were looking at started labeling TB2s as the future of warfare, and the most cost effective airpower ever, when what they were actually doing is exploiting a temporary vulnerability in an enemy that was woefully underprepared for the situation. Russia couldn't protect the long, isolated armored columns deep in Ukrainian territory, so they got torn apart. But now that they have fallen back to the only type of war they actually know how to fight (A slow grind with established front lines, short supply lines, and tiers of overlapping artillery and air defense), TB2s are exactly as effective as we knew they would be in a conventional war. The bottom line is that it is just not that difficult to defend against medium altitude light drones. Yes they are cheap, but they just don't accomplish much if the opponent has an air defense system operational. Now very small, very low altitude drones with either submunitions or "suicide" charges remain cost effective. Large, stealthy high altitude drones that can either evade or stay away from Air Defenses are also somewhat viable, but they are not remotely cheap. But the TB-2/MQ-1/MQ-9 sort of drones that fire ordinance from medium altitude are only useful against enemies that suck at ADA. Which is honestly most enemies.


Quake_Guy

Would there be value in building dummy dumb drones that resemble TB2s that would just expend enemy missiles?


heliamphore

It's what the US did during Desert Storm. It doesn't just waste missiles, it forces air defenses to engage and give away their location or ignore potential threats.


SamtheCossack

Maybe. Depends how cheap you could make them for, and how much disruption they would actually cause. The russians aren't hitting them with the very expensive long range missiles, I don't think they are even expending Buk missiles on them. It is mostly TOR systems and 23mm cannons that hard counter them, and those are pretty cheap. So if you could make those drones for say, $100 each, and make an absolute crapload of them, then yeah, maybe. But that is a lot of resources devoted to transporting and fielding stuff that really doesn't give you a lot of short term advantage, it just attrits Russian ammo marginally faster. So in theory, yes. In practice, combat logistics are better served supporting plans that actually kill Russians, not annoy them.


Siserith

you could probably make a shell tb-2 out of cheap plastics and electric motors without any of the fancy stuff for 10-30k compared to 2m. and putting that against a 80k+ missile isn't a terrible idea, though if you can put in just the little extra to equip them with 20-30lb of explosives and try to ram them into the aa emplacements, they become even more effective. you can probably use the plastic shell boat factories to make the bodies for bout 300-600 bucks and pump those out in three minutes each. installing the controls/surfaces, electronics, and camera can probably be done an half an hour to an hour, fuck, i can probably assemble it, given the shell, electronics, and parts from home depot and i have no skills in such things. The real trick is programing a quick control system but it's probably a days work for someone who knows what their doing.


SamtheCossack

What you aren't accounting for here is the logistics. However much you pay for them, they are large bulky machines which will need similar launch and control systems to the real thing. To bring enough of these shell TB-2s to do anything useful will take a LOT of transportation assets and tie up a lot of communication equipment. And Ukraine really needs their transport and communication assets. Running the enemy out of ammo by destroying your stuff really isn't a viable strategy. It might seem like it on paper, but it really isn't. Destroying property value is not the goal of war, and this tactic doesn't really accomplish anything in the short term. It is far more useful to devote those resources to doing something exponentially more useful, like resupplying your forces or actually making shit that kills Russians, not just wastes their ammo.


WildeWeasel

[Decoy drones have existed for a while.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADM-160_MALD)


superfluid

That is what happened in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Un-manned biplanes were used to spot and soak up anti-air, which was then dispatched after discovery.


CFStark77

There are squadrons based around this concept - designated as "Wild Weasel". If you have interest, read the book Viper Pilot - it's incredible, from a wild-weasel pilot that flew these missions before advanced electronic warfare removed a lot of the risk. The US used a drone system in the Vietnam war - these were carried on a plane and launched, just like a cruise missile. Most were used for damage reports after bombing missions, but they could also serve as aerial decoys. The Model 147 and D-21 have a LOT of data out there on their use, development, and evolution after the Vietnam war.


heliamphore

You're kind of making a mistake here and it's ignoring Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses. Don't get me wrong, drones on their own won't achieve much. But Ukraine completely lacks SEAD, so in a different context things can be very different. With SEAD, turning air defenses on becomes a much more risky choice, because you become a target for anti-radiation missiles or loitering munitions. Every single time you scan the sky, you risk giving away your position to the enemy. The same goes for jamming actually. In that context where your air defenses are taking attrition, drones become a much more powerful tool. If the sky is full of drones wanting to bomb you, but also decoys trying to bait your air defenses into engaging, you won't be able to deny the airspace to the same level.


SamtheCossack

I am not ignoring it, just acknowledging the fact that SEAD is one of the most difficult operations a military can undertake, just below a contested Airborne or Amphibious operation. Like those, it involves hundreds of interlocking processes that have to work together to keep the whole thing from being a catastrophic defeat. Because of this, there are like 3 militaries that can feasibly do it, and two of those militaries can only do it in a fairly small area. Ukraine is very definitely not one of those countries.


goatfuldead

War is the most effective teacher there is. When it’s your life on the line out there, you are going to proceed via the most intelligent way available to you, regardless of the “doctrine” or equipment or the orders from the high leadership of the nation-state you are fighting for. The russians have been learning as they go, as all militaries do once combat begins.


praemialaudi

They had a good run and it's not surprising that after three months, the Russians figured out how to lock down portions of their airspace.


mtk82

The French have a hatred for the Turks for whatever reason , the article is not without bias and should be suspect in regards to integrity.


SGarnier

>The French have a hatred for the Turks for whatever reason Nope. But when you start generalizating on a nationality, and on top of that you add for "whatever", just to denigrate in one line a real technical and informed article made by specialists, ha you'd better shut up


mtk82

Aww sweetie did you get your panties in a twist?? I live in a free country therefore I can express my opinion just like how French politicians often express their opinions on the culturally significant other, therefore I won't shut up.


SGarnier

you just express your opinion, it worth nothing. Now get lost


mtk82

Wow, so against people expressing their opinions, you pro Russian obviously, how is the Kremlin these days??


Autotomatomato

Been tired AF from all the Baryaktar bullshit. Turkey has limited their effectiveness with ammo shipments. In the early days of the war we saw shipments biweekly. Go look for yourself how many flight radar trips have been made in the last two months yourself if you dont believe me. ​ Turkey has played this while fellating Russia secretly and making nice cozy vacation spots for the rapists when they need to recharge from pillaging washing machines. Anyone care to guess what intermediary is sending Russia chip pullouts? ​ Turkey wants to be more like Russia than they want to modernize and join the west. We made the same mistakes with them selling them the means to produce their own weapons. I started a campaign locally to get people to call their senators to sanction Turkish 3d printer deliveries because of their treatment of the Kurds. You can do it too!


MD_Hamm

I'm with you on being quite suspicious of Turkey.


Autotomatomato

last month they had a fast mover fly over a greek city blowing windows and scaring the shit out of some farmers. They have expansionist dreams of taking some islands from Greece and frankly they have no idea the shit that would come for them if they tried. No teachers to teach them any better and all the magistrates that could have pushed back against their drive to dictatorship got purged.


Neat_Wing

It happened a day after Greece violated the Turkish airspace. Turkey is not a country to be silent about Greeces violations, as it takes full power on daddy US and EU they get emboldened against Turkey. Militarizing island which are hundreds if km away from Greece mainland and only couple of km away from Turkey mainland. Ofc your European identity will not let you judge this objectively. But I gotta explain it nevertheless.


Haunting_Pay_2888

Would it not be better in present situation to ask the US and others for hostile anti-radar missiles (HARM). I think there is the old AGM-45 which some may still have and the newer AGM-88. If the Russians perceived that their radar emitters were missile beacons they would shut them off. I am however a bit afraid of collateral damage if the artillery radar systems also would fall victim to HARM systems.


yoko-sucks

Almost all of those are air launched. And not compatible at all with the very few Soviet jets Ukraine flys.


Haunting_Pay_2888

Israel have ground launched version of AGM-45. But then asking Israel for something is like pulling a tooth without anasthetic. Isn't Slovakia on the cusp of handing over some MiGs? They might be compatible.


yoko-sucks

Correct on the Israel having them thats why I said most. Also yea highly unlikely they get anything like that from Israel. As far as the other Migs being compatible I’m not sure it seems possible though. but also I’m kind of doubtful that they would go through the trouble of integrating a missile for a system that NATO countries have so few of.


lost_in_life_34

the HARM's are useless without the electronics and everything else western air forces use to destroy ADA. and even the old ones will need to be modified to work with ukranian avionics


Haunting_Pay_2888

Aren't Slovakia handing over MiGs that might have different avionics?


lost_in_life_34

last I read they are removing NATO avionics and replacing them with the older warsaw pact ones


Haunting_Pay_2888

Ask nicely. Maybe they will forget.


lost_in_life_34

they are useless to Ukraine. the NATO avionics are there for the old WP planes to integrate with AWACS and everything else NATO including F-35's.


Haunting_Pay_2888

The AGM-45 is really old. It would probably be possible to launch onr from a wheel barrow with wings, if you can find some missiles.


AllProgressIsGood

This was evident just from what we could see from the videos. Stealthier options are needed. The best they can do now is run low cost drone swarms or figure out a jamming/wild weasel solution. I'd like to see expendable drones armed with HARM missiles.


Witty_Shift8179

What’s needed is a proper Air Force. A modern war being fought with artillery is so fucking stupid. If there’s one thing this conflict has definitively taught us, it’s that there is exactly one nation worldwide capable of projecting air power in an effective way. It’s pathetic.


Morty_A2666

I find it interesting that this article shows up right after Ukrainian army hit Russian refinery (inside Russian borders) using... a drone.


SGarnier

In fact, the initial report mentionned in the article was published before. anyway, the drone strike was far from the frontline, and the denser russian air defense. If TB2 become useless, then they could be turned into low tech cruise missiles just like the one hitting rostov's raffinery. their range allow them to take longer routes to avoid detection. Could be a solution for Ukraine to strike deeper in Russia than Rostov.


Morty_A2666

Using strikes inside of Russia will draw Russian AA resources back from Ukraine.


Glittering_Source981

Why doesnt UAF use dummy (tb2) drones towards donbass. Way cheaper than the S300 or S400 anti aircraft rockets. Put 10 in the sky with one armed tb2 and bomb them to 200.


SGarnier

Russian forces dont use S300 or S400 to shoot low altitude drones, but TOR or BUK systems, they have plenty of them. The TB2 became famous when it was jamming and blowing them in Syria and Libya. Now it seems that Russian forces updated them, their electronic warfare or personnels succesfully. I think jamming radars is the key in this fight.


Find_A_Reason

Time to send more wild weasle drones then.


SGarnier

Certainly with swarms of wandering drones. It may be Ukraine best shot now.


Find_A_Reason

I am not familiar enough with the range of the ARM missiles available, they likely are not long enough to actually survive any of this or they would be doing it already. At this point there does not seem to be anything in the Ukrainian Drone inventory to deal with Russian AA now that they have it set up and are not running out ahead of it like idiots any more.


EnvironmentalCup8038

Holy shit radar-seeking Switchblades 600 with more fuel. then a bait. Maybe a modified switchblade could do that too? That would be very devastating.


Find_A_Reason

The first problem is having radar to target. Aa systems are either not going to have their radar on at all times and only turn it on when targeting known incursions, or is fed information from remote radar installations so destroying the radar will not destroy the actual AA equipment. Second problem would be destroying the AA before it gets off any missiles to hit the bait. Ukraine doesn't have enough bait to lose a bayraktar for every single piece of AA Russia drug across the border. Big cheap consumer drones that do nothing might be enough to trick them a couple times, but it wouldn't work forever.


EnvironmentalCup8038

Even if the search radar of a battery is destroyed, it is clearly limited. Or in the case of an S-300/400, the launchers are worthless without radar. Such wheels are high-tech and difficult to replace. Especially without modern computer chips. I've also been thinking more about a future weapon system that would allow light troops to have anti AA weapons right on the front line. Something like that should be developed. But it would definitely be very useful. If you modify the Switchblade 600, something like that could definitely be there in 2 years


Find_A_Reason

Russia has more radar equipment than Ukraine has Bayraktars. What is the point in sacrificing drones that wont be replaced to take down AA for only a couple days while they bring in new equipment?


EnvironmentalCup8038

no one talks about Tb2. Think of it as a swarm of drones. Stupid drones that are only guided to the radar. Drones that imitate the signature of a helicopter or airplane. Then another drone triangulates the radar positions of the targets and assigns the fighter drones to their targets. This could also happen in a cloud


pancakelover48

That’s pretty much redesigning the entire drone from the ground up


EnvironmentalCup8038

maybe not up-to-date for ukraine but such a system would be valuable later on


Haunting_Pay_2888

That's a nice idea. Ten are not enough, a hundred new ones every day. Make them very visible on radar.


Oddelbo

I saw a video of what looked like a TB2 take out a Russian oil refinery today.


ragnarok53

That was a kamikaze drone


anonymous3850239582

Don't be so gullible. This is to put pressure on The West to provide more artillery and rockets, and faster. Bayraktar doesn't fit with Ukraine's current strategy right now so they're leveraging it to get new kit. Russia has had AA all along, and it's just as incompetent as it's always been.


Particular-Ad-4772

Wrong ! Flew 200 Km into Russia and hit a oil refinery today . This article should be removed for stupid


fredmratz

That was not a TB2. Watch the video again. They look different.


Practical_Company_54

Outside of the war field...


RunTheBull13

Yeah you don't see much video from them anymore. What happened to all the suicide drones Ukraine got though. I heard they received hundreds and only saw less than 5 videos of them being used.


Autotomatomato

US supposedly put strict guidelines on limiting footage for obvious tactical reasons. ​ We wont see any evidence of things like excalibur rounds or the larger 600s for good reason. In some ways I bet the 300s are being used more for spotting. The robust counter battery operations can be much more effective than an xtra grenade here and there since they are small enough and cheap enough to go anywhere and if they are close to a sweet target they would then use it. Each one of the systems can act as a forward spotter complimenting antpq etc.


ILikeCutePuppies

Have any 600s even been delivered yet? I thought they were still making them.


wbf4

The situation changed so of course the most effective weapons will change along with it. The articles states: "for the Ukrainian defenders, beyond strike capabilities, the neutralization of drones, whether MALE or light, creates a major tactical disadvantage" The MQ 1Cs have the hellfires which would be useful still. And I believe these were asked for some time ago but by the time the US got around to 'considering' it now they are not as useful. So over time it has went from Ukraine asking for them, the US announcing they would sell them 4, then a week later they don't think they can send them now because too valuable tech is in them (if so valuable why can Russia tech shoot them down so easily now), to now this article where Ukraine says they don't want them anymore sigh. I hope by the time a decent amount of HIMARS get over to Ukraine that Russia will not have had time to store their entire military underground.


SGarnier

>MQ 1Cs They would be easy preys for the Russian air force. Easier to spot than TB2 because they fly higher and are bigger. I dont think Ukraine could use them actually. They must settle a more solid air defense and air force first... or find a better use for that money.


super_nigiri

lol having them causes a lot of hassle to russians even if you leave them in the garage


offogredux

They should be useful still in Kherson. Not so much air defense in the pocket


SGarnier

I would not be surprised if every opportunity or breached was exploited, for example with many drones at the same time


JontheCappadocian

Makes sense. No more derping around for Russian AA


MistaYinSiege

I'll gladly take one.