The war between Russia and Ukraine has revolutionized modern warfare, with tactical reconnaissance drones becoming a game-changer. These unmanned aerial vehicles provide unprecedented battlefield awareness, making traditional troop concealment nearly impossible and shifting the conflict to positional warfare.

The Ukrainian Deep State project focuses on a crucial question: how can we effectively counter these air threats? analysis reveals a promising solution: using drones to combat drones, specifically by using low-cost FPV (First Person View) unmanned vehicles.

This strategy has already had success in the field. In June, Ukrainian border guards shot down a Russian ZALA reconnaissance drone in Odessa Oblast, while the SIGNUM unit of the 93rd Mechanized Brigade intercepted a fast-moving Lancet loitering munition.

On June 10, Ukrainian border guards in the Odessa region managed to spot and destroy a Russian unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Zala in the air. The aircraft was conducting a reconnaissance operation in southern Ukraine.

Ukrainian forces used an FPV drone to take it out in the… photo.twitter.com/kSRKVeraGb

— Euromaidan Press (@EuromaidanPress) June 12, 2024

Drone-on-drone warfare was initially a grassroots tactic developed by individual units, but is now on the verge of being applied on a large scale in air defense operations. This shift represents a significant leap in counter-drone strategies and offers a cost-effective and adaptable solution to modern air threats.

The Four Levels of Military Drones: From Mini to Mammoth

Drones in modern warfare fall into four categories:

1. HALE (High Altitude Long Endurance)Examples include the Global Hawk and the Chinese WZ-8, which operate at altitudes of 18 to 20 km (60,000 to 70,000 feet) for extended periods, often longer than 24 hours.
2. MALE (Medium Altitude Long Endurance): Such as the MQ-9 Reaper, Orion and the Bayraktar TB2, which operated at 4-9 km (15,000-30,000 feet) for over 20 hours.
3. Tactical UAVs: Includes Ukraine’s Leleka-100 and Russia’s Orlan-10. These operate at lower altitudes, typically below 4.6 km (15,000 ft), for shorter durations (5-10 hours), and are used for battlefield reconnaissance and targeting.
4. Mini/micro drones: Commercially available FPV quadcopters that have been converted for combat. These operate at very low altitudes, often below 120 meters (400 feet), for short durations, but offer unprecedented tactical flexibility.

While Ukraine can counter large Russian drones with traditional air defenses, and cheap mini-drones fall victim to large-scale electronic warfare (EW), tactical UAVs pose the biggest challenge.

These medium-sized drones are cheaper than their larger counterparts, with wingspans of a few meters and masses of tens of kilograms, and cost around $100,000. However, they can be equipped with powerful communications and navigation systems, which provides high resistance to interference. The Russian Orlan-10’s Kometa-M satellite navigation CRPA antenna is an example of this resilience. Only rare, powerful systems such as the Ukrainian Bukovel AD offer effective countermeasures.

This new reality has a three-tiered defense:

• National Air Forces vs. Big Drones
• “Trench” EW vs. mini-drones
• Army units deploying tactical UAVs.

However, ground-based air defense (army units) is struggling with a perfect storm:

• Too many targets, too few interceptors
• Systems designed for aircraft, not for agile drones
• Vulnerability to precision strikes, as seen with Russia’s Lancet kamikaze drones and Iskander missiles.

Missiles, weapons and innovation

The backbone of ground-based air defense has long been missile systemswhere various air threats are addressed with radio-guided or infrared-homing missiles. While radio guidance is cheaper, infrared systems offer better precision, but at a higher cost and with vulnerabilities to decoys.

Cost-effectiveness drives innovation. The APKWS is an example of this innovation. This $40,000 laser-guided upgrade to the Hydra 70 rocket offers precision at a fraction of the cost of traditional rockets. It is a key component of the Vehicle-Agnostic Modular Palletized ISR Rocket Equipment (VAMPIRE) system, which has proven effective against Russian Shahed-136 drones in Ukraine.

Interestingly, the drone era has been revived anti-aircraft guns.

• Ukraine offers employment Soviet Era Weapons such as the ZU-23-2, KS-19 and S-60. While the KS-19 and S-60 are often modified for ground targets, the ZU-23-2 excels against large, slow, low-flying drones such as the Shahed.
• The German Gepard self-propelled anti-aircraft gundeveloped in the 1960s, it is reliable but vulnerable to Russian weapons and has a limited range of 4 km, making it less effective near the front lines.

• Advanced systems such as the German Skynex pushing the boundaries even further. At €180 million for two units, it uses programmable munitions and destroys drones for around €4,000 each. Yet it shares the Gepard’s 4km range limitation. This makes it a challenge to provide troops with comprehensive drone protection.

This mix of old and new, missiles and guns, underscores an important point: effective air defense in the drone age requires a layered, diverse approachWhile no single system is a silver bullet, the combination of different technologies provides a robust defense against the evolving air threat.

The Rise of FPV Drone Interceptors

In a classic case of fighting fire with fire, the threat of tactical reconnaissance drones is met with an unexpected counterbalance: modified FPV drones.

Capable of reaching speeds of up to 150 km/h (93 mph), these agile interceptors transform from hobby toys to aerial fighters. Equipped with cameras, communications systems and explosive charges, they are designed for a single purpose: collide with and destroy larger, more expensive enemy drones.

The main challenges lie in target acquisition and payload detonation. Rapid advances in machine vision address the former, while automatic triggers based on LIDAR solve the latter. These improvements, while increasing costs, keep FPV interceptors economically viable compared to traditional air defense missiles.

At the heart of this drone-versus-drone battle lies advanced radar systems:

• Advanced long-range radars track multiple targets at distances of more than 50 km (31 miles), providing comprehensive visibility into the air situation.
• Mobile systems suitable for frontline use and with a range of 30-50 km (19-31 miles) provide flexibility in dynamic combat zones.

Both types provide near-real-time detection with sub-second latencies, which is critical for combating agile drone threats.

For Ukraine’s specific needs, simpler but effective radar stations with detection ranges of 30-50 km prove invaluable. These systems, whether Ukrainian or Western in origin, are actively deployed along the front lines. Their ability to detect Russian drones in real time with minimal delay makes them a crucial asset in Ukraine’s air defense strategy.

Within the Ukrainian FPV drone defense system

The smallest unit in the interception system is a platoonconsisting of 3-4 groups of FPV operators and radar technicians. Each group is equipped with a vehicle, essential equipment (antennas, batteries, tablets, radios) and a fixed number of FPV interceptors. For safety, operator units are placed several kilometers from the radar.

Ukraine drone defense system combines simplicity with advanced technology. This is how it works:

• Advanced radar stations detect incoming threats and send the data directly to command units.
• Operators launch FPV interceptor drones, controlled by real-time coordinates.
• As the interceptors approach, the operators take over visual observation.
• In the final phase, automated systems control the approach and detonation.
• Human oversight remains crucial for last-minute adjustments and troubleshooting.

Major technological advances such as reliable drones, remote detonators and machine vision have simplified this process. While skilled operators are still essential, these innovations reduce the need for expert-level pilots, making the system more accessible and scalable.

This system is effective, but it has to do with challenges. Enemy electronic warfare, battery limitations, and weather conditions pose significant threats. In addition, the radar stations critical to this network are vulnerable to Russian anti-radiation missiles and electronic reconnaissance. Despite these obstacles, the system’s cost-effectiveness (custom FPV drones cost as little as $1,000 each) and adaptability make it an attractive alternative to traditional air defense systems.

a complex A front line that can cover more than 40 kilometers typically includes:

• Three platoons with 2-3 radar stations
• A unified command post
• Signal repeaters
• Multiple mobile shooting groups for additional cover and interaction.

The price tag of the equipment is around $ 1 million. The density of the defensive “dome” increases with more FPV units.

To cover Ukraine’s 1,200 km front line, ideally 60 such complexes are needed, but 25 would be enough for urgent needs.

****

In the changing landscape of modern warfare, FPV interceptors emerge as a game-changing solution against enemy tactical UAVs. This innovative approach offers a cost-effective and adaptable alternative to traditional air defense systems.

Their appeal lies in their simplicity and efficiency. An interceptor drone costs a fraction of conventional surface-to-air missiles, but when integrated into a comprehensive system, these agile defenders prove remarkably effective. Their rapid development and deployment cycle enables rapid adaptation to emerging threats.

This strategy is still in its early stages and its success depends on advanced electronic intelligence, seamless communication systems and well-trained operators. Although not a one-size-fits-all solution, FPV interceptors represent a significant leap forward in air defense strategy.

Read more: