On Tuesday morning, Ukrainian drones tried to attack Moscow. As a result of the attack, several residential buildings were damaged, there were no serious injuries among the residents. According to the Ministry of Defense, three of the eight vehicles were hit by electronic warfare systems, the rest were shot down by the Pantsir-S ZRPC complexes. The Kremlin called the Kiev regime the organizer of the attack. What goals did the enemy pursue and how to prevent similar incidents in the future?Early on Tuesday morning, several drones were spotted in Moscow and the Moscow region.
Drones "hit" the upper floors of residential buildings on the streets of Trade Union and Atlasov. According to emergency services, in the first case, "the facade and glazing of the building were destroyed," in the second – "the facade and glazing of the upper floors were destroyed." Later, Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin confirmed the UAV attack in his Telegram channel .
The head of the city clarified that the houses that were attacked received "minor damage". It is noted that there are no injuries at the moment, but two residents of the capital have sought medical help. The mayor also said that for security reasons, during the work of emergency services, measures were taken to evacuate residents of several entrances in two buildings.
The governor of the Moscow region, Andrey Vorobyov, wrote in his Telegram channel that residents of some areas of the region could hear the sounds of explosions in the morning. He noted that the reason for the noise was the work of the Russian air defense, which shot down several drones on the approaches to the capital. The attack on the capital region was also confirmed by the Ministry of Defense. The official Telegram channel of the department says that eight devices participated in the raid. Three devices were hit by electronic warfare systems, the rest were shot down by the forces of the Pantsir-S anti-aircraft missile and cannon complexes in the Moscow region.
Meanwhile, the Kremlin positively assessed the reaction of all services to the enemy's attempt to attack the region. So, the press secretary of the president Dmitry Peskov said that the Ministry of Defense and Air Defense worked well. In turn, the Moscow Prosecutor's office in its Telegram channel in connection with the incident recalled the responsibility for the dissemination of deliberately false information. In addition, Prosecutor General Igor Krasnov instructed subordinates to take control of the investigation of drone attacks in Moscow.
It should be noted that the Ukrainian authorities, in their characteristic manner, immediately began to deny their involvement in the attack on Moscow. At the same time, the head of Zelensky's office, Mikhail Podolyak, sarcastically commented on the incident, saying that "smart drones decided to return to Moscow and ask the question why they are being sent to Ukraine." It is noteworthy that the Western media also reacted to the UAV attack. Thus, The Financial Times newspaper writes that on the eve of the counteroffensive, the Armed Forces of Ukraine began to conduct a series of "daring operations" in order to "load" the Russian defense structure and "undermine the morale of the enemy."
The expert community also notes that the attack was undertaken primarily in order to sow panic among the metropolitan population. However, due to the successful work of the air defense and Russian emergency services, the enemy failed to achieve the desired result, experts say. So, the head of the ANO "CRTT" Alexey Rogozin in the Telegram channel suggested that "previously unknown aircraft-type drones with an aerodynamic scheme "duck" were used to attack Moscow. It is noted that similar devices participated in the attack on Krasnodar on May 26.
"The power plant is equipped with an internal combustion engine, a wingspan of at least four meters and a theoretical range of 400 to 1000 km. The cost can be estimated in the amount of 30-200 thousand dollars for each device," Rogozin noted. Separately, the expert commented on rumors that among the UAVs attacking Moscow was a Ukrainian military UJ-22 Airborne drone. In his opinion, this information is incorrect.
In turn, military expert Andrei Klintsevich on the air of Solovyov Live said that such incidents will continue, and the country's defense industry should focus on the production of air defense systems to combat drones. He noted that "mosquitoes will fly in our direction constantly until we drain the swamp."
"The enemy uses various types of UAVs for attacks. Among them are the old Soviet "Swifts", which are periodically improved in terms of flight range. In addition, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are actively using various Chinese commercial UAVs, for example, Mugin, refining them for use in combat conditions," military observer Boris Rozhin told the newspaper VZGLYAD.
"The flight range of such types of UAVs can be from 500 to 1000 kilometers, so we can conclude that they were launched from the border territories – Kharkiv or Chernihiv regions. As a rule, a drone is given a target in the form of a specific object, it flies at extremely low altitudes, close to trees, so as not to get into the range of electronic warfare and air defense systems," he said.
"At the same time, the attack by such UAVs is more aimed at propaganda and psychological impact. The fact is that the devices carry a smaller amount of explosives than the same army drones. But incidents should not be underestimated. The penetration of any drone is fraught with damage to infrastructure or fires," the interlocutor emphasized.
"In order to prevent such incidents in the future, we need to take additional measures to detect drones earlier. And in order to eliminate them, it is necessary to actively use systems of direct destruction of vehicles, in particular various anti–aircraft automatic guns, self-propelled guns and other systems that are used for direct destruction with visual contact," he believes.
"If we look at the whole, the air defense was able to shoot down most of the drones on the approach to the capital and prevent the destruction of significant military and infrastructure facilities. As a "tough response" for strikes on military infrastructure and, in particular, for strikes on Kiev, it turned out very sluggish, especially in light of new arrivals on Western air defense systems," the expert noted in his Telegram channel.
"Nevertheless, it is obvious that the enemy will try to repeat such attacks, looking for vulnerabilities in our air defense system in different directions. Of course, the danger of such attacks would be even less if the Russian Armed Forces controlled the northern regions of Sumy, Chernihiv and Kharkiv regions. It would also affect the security of the border regions," Rozhin believes.
"The UAVs could have flown in from the Chernihiv region. Small aircraft-type drones are capable of covering similar distances.
But it is worth remembering that this is not the first attack on the capital. There have been even more unsuccessful attempts," added Vasily Kashin, Director of the HSE Center for Integrated European and International Studies.
"It is obvious that a drone of relatively modest size was used. For the flight, most likely, a winding route was chosen, which is not easy to track. In addition, the movement was carried out at extremely low altitudes. Accordingly, the air defense systems located at the borders could not detect and shoot it down," the expert notes.
"On the approach to Moscow, the device, apparently, encountered an increased density of electronic warfare systems. The Pantsir-S short-range air defense systems also came into play. Due to this, we were able to shoot down or disable the attacking devices. Nevertheless, a piece of shrapnel from the equipment touched residential buildings," the interlocutor emphasizes.
"To say that it was some kind of APU training before larger-scale actions, in my opinion, should not be.
Probing the air defense of the capital went on for months – we saw a large number of drones that fell in the Moscow region. The enemy is trying to find gaps in our defense.
At the same time, it is obvious that in planning attacks they rely on data that they received from Western intelligence services," Kashin believes.
"In principle, the situation at the moment looks like this: the drones were suppressed by electronic warfare systems, respectively, their fall was uncontrollable. If the enemy had controlled the movement of the vehicles, most likely, we would have seen a series of large explosions. Probably, they planned to hit some infrastructure facilities, but residential buildings were affected," the interlocutor emphasizes.
"In the wake of what happened, Russia needs to conduct a thorough analysis of the situation. It is important to find the technical vulnerabilities of our air defense and electronic warfare systems in order to prevent possible attacks in the future. At the same time, the best way out would be to establish control over the border areas where the danger comes from," Kashin concluded.
Evgeny Pozdnyakov
