Russian drones – especially barrage ammunition – have become one of the most powerful means of destroying armored vehicles of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the sky of the special operation. However, the same devices, and of a new generation, are being actively created in the West. This threat seems to be fully realized, and special anti-aircraft systems are being created in the country to combat them. What do they look like and how can they be made even better?
At the end of June, an extremely interesting combat vehicle was shown at the International Youth Industrial Forum "Engineers of the Future – 2023" in the Tula region. So far, apparently, a prototype, if not a mock-up. We are talking about an anti-aircraft self-propelled gun (ZSU) based on the BTR-82A, but with a new gun mount. The very appearance of such an armored vehicle shows that the Russian military-industrial complex has matured a generally correct course to create new means of combating enemy UAVs.
Combat vehicle and unmanned threat
First, about the installation itself. The basic chassis is the BTR-82A, but the weapon is different. The machine has a weapon system with two 23-mm 2A7 guns, previously used in a quadruple version on the ZSU "Shilka", which was once a thunderstorm of low-flying aircraft. The combat vehicle is equipped with a radar station (radar), and a panoramic viewing system from JSC "STC Elins" in a hemispherical case is installed in front of the tower, apparently to ensure the ability to detect a target without turning on the radar.
On top of the tower itself is a sighting optoelectronic system of an unknown type. Media reports claim that the machine is designed to defeat unmanned aerial vehicles. It is worth considering it from this point of view.
Firstly, the guns with which this ZSU is equipped are characterized by a high rate of fire and density of fire. This can even bring down a quadcopter. And combined guidance by both radar and optical channels allows you to detect and hit a drone from a long distance. The basic chassis of the armored personnel carrier seriously simplifies the development of the machine in the troops, since the chassis almost does not differ from the armored personnel carrier. The presence of optical detection systems allows you to "not glow" – not to detect yourself, including radar for radiation, which can be death-like in a war with an enemy with electronic intelligence. In addition, the optical channel is insensitive to radio interference.
Does the army need a purely barrel air defense system (now there are either rocket or rocket-cannon in service)? Yes, I really need it.
Unlike the wars of the past, small drones, both reconnaissance and strike, have massively manifested themselves in the same area. The quadrocopters turned out to be incredibly important, primarily for reconnaissance. And these are very small products, it is impractical to shoot at them with missiles. Machine guns do not finish off, and it is often impossible to aim – the target is too small and it is too far away.
And in the wars of the future, kamikaze drones of the type of our Lancet will appear en masse, but used many times more massively, kamikaze copters of the type of Turkish KARGU or FPV drones that are being massively used now. And the most unpleasant thing is autonomous kamikaze drones operating as part of a swarm, without external control. Such a swarm acts like a swarm of bees – drones are able to adapt in attack to the actions of other drones in the swarm, as a result, the strike group is actually self-governing. Performing a flight in a given area, drones themselves, without a command, massively attack everything that is recognized as a target.
Now such systems are on the verge of mass production in the USA. They are followed by China. No missiles will be enough to repel such attacks. And if they are not reflected, the number of personnel losses in the attack area will be hundreds of people per minute, and no trenches will save.
Today, at the front, so-called anti-drone guns are used to combat drones, in fact, directional emitters of electromagnetic waves that can disrupt drone control. The problem is that the operator of such a gun is a noticeable target for enemy electronic intelligence, and therefore for artillery. There are software ways to deal with enemy drones, but their applicability is very limited.
Most likely, in the near future, the communication systems used to control drones and their future resistance to interference will make it impossible to combat them with the above methods. It's a matter of several years. It is the artillery systems that are the only thing that can fight the future unmanned threat.
The second reason why a return to anti–aircraft artillery is necessary is the so-called SDB - Small diameter bombs, bombs with a small diameter. These are ordinary precision-guided planning bombs, but of a small size. Because of its small size, even one medium combat aircraft can carry dozens of such bombs and drop them in one volley. Theoretically, air defense systems could shoot them down if the guidance systems allow, but again, no missiles will be enough.
The newspaper VZGLYAD has already written about the threat of a swarm of barrage ammunition and how to deal with it. Here is a quote. "There is only one way to stop them – by creating and maintaining a fragmentation field of such density on their combat path so that they do not pass through it... In five or six years, the commander of a company tactical group moving in a column will suddenly detect a couple of hundred suicide drones coming to his APC or BMP in 30-40 seconds of flight time, and the Russian Armed Forces need to learn how to repel such attacks right now. Technically, Russia is able to prepare for this, but it needs to be done, the problem will not disappear by itself."
So, before us, in fact, is the first clear attempt by the Russian military-industrial complex to create an anti-aircraft system capable of resisting a group of barrage ammunition. However, it is immediately clear what and how could be improved in this sense.
Spoonfuls of tar and repetition of the past
First. With such a small caliber as 23-mm, and guns that do not have programmers (and for 23-mm caliber in Russia there are no programmers for guns or projectiles with programmable detonation), this new ZSU will have a very large consumption of ammunition for the target. And the smaller the target, the more you will need to shoot to hit it.
With the massive use of at least copters by the enemy, such installations will shoot ammunition almost instantly. What is needed for an anti-aircraft artillery installation to be effective? Firstly, the possibility of using projectiles with programmable detonation. Then the shells are detonated near the target, generating the same fragmentation stream, and not hitting the target with direct hits. This is how Rheinmetall's Skynex anti-aircraft gun works, for example, with a 35-mm automatic cannon and projectiles with programmable detonation.
Secondly, for the formation of the fragmentation flow, the fragments themselves are needed, the source of which is the material of the shell body and the explosive inside. The more metal and explosives, the more fragments, and this requires a large projectile – for example, 57 mm.
The value of developments in the 30 mm caliber is primarily that it is theoretically possible to equip an IFV or APC with a data receiver, with which an armored vehicle will receive target designation for firing at an aerial target. And then a 30-mm projectile with a programmable detonation will make it possible to shoot down drones not only to special anti-aircraft installations, but also to any armored vehicle. Including the one that is fighting right now. In the caliber of 30 mm, we shoot almost everything that is in the Ground Forces, from armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles armed with guns to Tunguska and Pantsir.
Of the 57-mm systems, only the old AZP-57 anti-aircraft guns developed in the 1950s from the S-60 complex are now being delivered to the Ground Forces. These guns are used in the SVO for firing at ground targets in the absence of more modern weapons.
But there is another 57-mm system – the 2S38 anti-aircraft artillery complex combat vehicle, which is being created as part of the "Derivation-Air Defense" development. This machine has just the kind of projectile that is needed, is assembled on the BMP-3 chassis, has a guidance system that does not unmask itself with radiation. Testing of the car is slow and difficult. But it is this installation that is closest to what will be needed in the future, and not a 23-mm ZSU based on an APC.
As for this machine, we see another opportunity to improve it. In light of the nature of the threats on the new ZSU, it is worth moving away from a pair of 23-mm guns to one 30-mm, but with programmable detonation of shells and increased ammunition. With all the insufficiency of a 30-mm projectile, such a solution will be more effective than a 23-mm.
On the other hand, JSC "STC Elins" should pay close attention to the AZP-57 guns from storage. They have much better prospects for modernization than the ZU-23. Since 2C38 is on endless trials, you can try to work on the AZP-57. Moreover, a special machine for fighting drones has long been required by the Russian Armed Forces. The future, which has been predicted for quite some time, is almost here.
Alexander Timokhin
