[Goose]

Ukraine struck a Russian airbase with a mass drone attack last night. At first I thought it may be related to the recent degradation of Russian air defenses in Crimea and Belgorod, but this was in Rostov so it could mean their air defense systems are really spread thin or that they are just leaky to large scale drone attacks.

https://x.com/bradyafr/status/1801629416545521924
https://www.twz.com/air/ukraine-strikes-...lback-base

Good post! The Russian air defense is indeed spread thin and is by its design vulnerable to mass drone strikes. Of course that is true of the vast majority of all air defense systems. The drones used in these attacks (Dragon and Splash types, whatever these are) are not the hobbyist "quadcopter" type. They are larger and longer range, probably somewhat similar in concept to the Shahed 131.

As  has been pointed out before these drones fly low. As a result the radar horizon for an "early warning" radar based on the ground is about 20 miles. Nobody has (or can afford) early warning radars spaced that densely. Even if they could the drone would relatively quickly exit that range and now you have no idea where it is. High value targets may be protected by a local "point defense" system that can shoot down drones in the 20 mile radius coverage circle. Nobody has enough point defense missile systems to protect every (or even most) high value targets. Further, these systems can only engage "a few" targets at a time. If 70 drones show up at essentially the same time, it may kill some of them but not all of them. On top of that, the cost of the missile that hits the drone is at least 5 times the cost of the drone. If the point defense system is a Patriot battery the cost differential may be 1000 to 1. This system design inherently leaks and is not cost sustainable. Right now, Ukraine is in the same boat FWIW.

In order to defeat these drones you need at a minimum a Barrier Combat Air Patrol (BARCAP) with fighters equipped with look-down shoot down capability. The BARCAP operates at a high altitude so it can see drones (or a swarm of drones) long before they reach the target. The aircraft are also faster that the low-cost drones and can cover a lot more ground than a point defense missile system can. The pilots can also call upon other aircraft for help and vector them to the area under attack long before the drones actually engage. Back in the day the PVO could do this. Too bad for Russia its gone :-). This system is not ideal because in most cases fighter aircraft do not have a "great" radar. The antenna space limitations preclude really high gain, really high power, and 360 degree coverage. There are some exceptions, but they are not Russian.

The "current" best practices is to add an AWACS to the system. It has a great radar and can see the drones much more easily. It can also direct the fighters in an "optimal" way. In addition, the "early warning" provided by the AWACS can allow the BARCAP to be reinforced by aircraft standing "alerts" on the ground. These aircraft can be immediately vectored toward the drone stream. Russia can, in theory, use an A-50 to do this. They aren't and AFAIK they haven't practiced such an operation against drones. Obviously that is what Israel and the allied air forces did against Iran. Granted they had the advantage of a very long drone flight to chew up the attack, but they did it. Russia (and Ukraine) will have to be quicker.

Obviously maintaining a BARCAP is a resource intensive operation. You need quite a few pilots and planes to do it. Lots of guys will get lots of hours drilling holes in the sky to no result. That is what you have to do though. Ground based missiles won't cut it unless they are active radar homing and the AWACS can control them directly. Missiles cost a lot. So do aircraft. However, aircraft can be used repeatedly. Missiles can't.

[Goose]

Ukraine struck a Russian airbase with a mass drone attack last night. At first I thought it may be related to the recent degradation of Russian air defenses in Crimea and Belgorod, but this was in Rostov so it could mean their air defense systems are really spread thin or that they are just leaky to large scale drone attacks.

https://x.com/bradyafr/status/1801629416545521924
https://www.twz.com/air/ukraine-strikes-...lback-base

Good post! The Russian air defense is indeed spread thin and is by its design vulnerable to mass drone strikes. Of course that is true of the vast majority of all air defense systems. The drones used in these attacks (Dragon and Splash types, whatever these are) are not the hobbyist "quadcopter" type. They are larger and longer range, probably somewhat similar in concept to the Shahed 131.

As  has been pointed out before these drones fly low. As a result the radar horizon for an "early warning" radar based on the ground is about 20 miles. Nobody has (or can afford) early warning radars spaced that densely. Even if they could the drone would relatively quickly exit that range and now you have no idea where it is. High value targets may be protected by a local "point defense" system that can shoot down drones in the 20 mile radius coverage circle. Nobody has enough point defense missile systems to protect every (or even most) high value targets. Further, these systems can only engage "a few" targets at a time. If 70 drones show up at essentially the same time, it may kill some of them but not all of them. On top of that, the cost of the missile that hits the drone is at least 5 times the cost of the drone. If the point defense system is a Patriot battery the cost differential may be 1000 to 1. This system design inherently leaks and is not cost sustainable. Right now, Ukraine is in the same boat FWIW.

In order to defeat these drones you need at a minimum a Barrier Combat Air Patrol (BARCAP) with fighters equipped with look-down shoot down capability. The BARCAP operates at a high altitude so it can see drones (or a swarm of drones) long before they reach the target. The aircraft are also faster that the low-cost drones and can cover a lot more ground than a point defense missile system can. The pilots can also call upon other aircraft for help and vector them to the area under attack long before the drones actually engage. Back in the day the PVO could do this. Too bad for Russia its gone :-). This system is not ideal because in most cases fighter aircraft do not have a "great" radar. The antenna space limitations preclude really high gain, really high power, and 360 degree coverage. There are some exceptions, but they are not Russian.

The "current" best practices is to add an AWACS to the system. It has a great radar and can see the drones much more easily. It can also direct the fighters in an "optimal" way. In addition, the "early warning" provided by the AWACS can allow the BARCAP to be reinforced by aircraft standing "alerts" on the ground. These aircraft can be immediately vectored toward the drone stream. Russia can, in theory, use an A-50 to do this. They aren't and AFAIK they haven't practiced such an operation against drones. Obviously that is what Israel and the allied air forces did against Iran. Granted they had the advantage of a very long drone flight to chew up the attack, but they did it. Russia (and Ukraine) will have to be quicker.

Obviously maintaining a BARCAP is a resource intensive operation. You need quite a few pilots and planes to do it. Lots of guys will get lots of hours drilling holes in the sky to no result. That is what you have to do though. Ground based missiles won't cut it unless they are active radar homing and the AWACS can control them directly. Missiles cost a lot. So do aircraft. However, aircraft can be used repeatedly. Missiles can't.