NSFW: Failed Interception Attempt Highlights Limitations Of Multirotor Drones As Interceptors Against Fixed-Wing Targets

⚠️🇷🇺 🇺🇦

⚠️***This NSFW features combat footage. Reading/viewing discretion is advised.***

Note: I have edited the video to remove the most graphic scenes. At least one person appears to have died in this incident. The edited video is being uploaded for informational purposes only. Posts featuring NSFW content including combat footage will never be monetized/paid, subscriber-only posts.

A new video from the Russia-Ukraine War captures the terminal dive of a Russian Molniya-2, which is an electrically-powered fixed-wing “first person video” (FPV) drone that relies on a radio frequency communication uplink/downlink—most “FPV drones” are electrically-powered multirotor designs (i.e., quadcopter designs). This video, which was notably disseminated on social media in a cropped format, is notable in that the attack sequence was recorded by a Ukrainian armed “FPV” multirotor drone of conventional design that was being used as a surface-to-air/anti-aircraft interceptor.

The interception attempt undertaken by the remote human operator/pilot of the Ukrainian armed “FPV” multirotor drone failed, and the targeted vehicle, a small civilian automobile, was destroyed, resulting in at least one likely fatality. The video highlights the challenge of intercepting a powered fixed-wing uncrewed aircraft that is undertaking a terminal dive—trading altitude for airspeed—with a conventional electrically-powered mulitoror drone. While faster electrically-powered multirotor drone designs exist and are being used in the Russia-Ukraine War as surface-to-air/anti-aircraft interceptors with increasing regularity, such designs are highly optimized toward that particular role, fly more like fixed-wing aircraft designs and are, as such, restricted in terms of maneuverability, and are not well-suited for use as a general-purpose uncrewed aircraft-turned-munition in the manner of the armed “FPV” multirotor drone that recorded the terminal dive of the Russian Molniya-2.

It is important to note that even if the Ukrainian armed “FPV” multirotor drone had successfully intercepted—crashed into with or without the detonation of any onboard warhead—the Russian Molniya-2, the Ukrainian drone would have likely been lost in the process and could not, as such, have been used to provide overwatch to that vehicle against a subsequent attack or any other vehicle. “FPV” multirotor drones are remotely operated/piloted and amount to a very labour-intensive approach—and therefore a technologically non-complex and very inexpensive approach—to uncrewed aircraft technology. It is simply impractical to assign multiple armed “FPV” multirotor drones—each with its own remote human operator/pilot—to provide overwatch across the frontlines.

The practical and effective employment of armed “FPV” multirotor drones in an overwatch role over friendly forces, including moving friendly vehicles, will, among other things, likely require the incorporation of a standoff multi-engagement capability so that a single remote human operator/pilot controlling a single armed “FPV” multirotor drone has multiple engagement attempts and can, in principle, neutralize multiple threats. Both Russia and Ukraine are experimenting with arming “FPV” multirotor drones with firearms—often a formulation of a shotgun—for such roles, and are more generally experimenting with a variety of other kinetic approaches to neutralizing small flying targets, including various formulations of what is best characterized as a net launcher. It remains to be seen how practical such approaches will be in real-world combat conditions. Until then, the use of armed “FPV” multirotor drones of conventional design to intercept fixed-wing uncrewed aircraft-turned-munitions undertaking a terminal dive—as opposed to a fixed-wing uncrewed aircraft-turned-munitions at cruise speed and in level flight—will be a low-probability event.