One of the biggest strategic points of analysis to me about the Ukraine war is how much more accuracy and range there is for very small ordnance. They have whole units dedicated to using commercial drones to drop hand grenades into the hatches of vehicles or trenches, like a different kind of mortar team that just does more with smaller HE payloads. As long as the Russians make a habit of leaving their hatches open and lack for distributed air defenses, hobby copters make for a very effective anti-tank weapon. And then when they do have air defenses and close their hatches, drones can still maneuver and find some other equipment worth dropping HE on.

In Iraq, a lot of the developing wisdom of frag protection was around roadside IEDs. But in an environment where literally any random moment could see a grenade land at your feet or detonate in midair dropped by a drone, the developing way to think about blast protection will be different. For one since one of the main benefits of drones is the ability to get perfect precision on targets with smaller payloads, the needed protection rating would likely be lower than when the anticipated HE threat is something more like a buried 155 shell, and that would allow for weight savings. If you grant the assumption that a soldier is already wearing ceramic plates on front and back, soft armor on the sides, and a ballistic helmet, then adding soft armor neck protection seems like a worthwhile weight tradeoff in a quadcopter grenade environment, whereas lower body kevlar like groin protectors might not be worth inhibiting your ability to run around in zig zags to evade the drone where it would have been more worthwhile where the threat profile was buried 155 shells. If a full kevlar hooded cloak would be too heavy for realistic field use, then another material that at least reduces the injuring effects of blast pressure and heat would still be worth making a big cloak out of to wear while walking around trenches.

Aside from ballistic protection, the other three ways to deal with drone frag are signature reduction, position design, and air defenses. And all I could add on those is "Wear the camo, dig the grenade sumps, have air defense, and stand under overhead cover".

This might be an interesting discussion.

Historically, for every offense devised, a defense is eventually developed.--and vice versa.

Sometimes these measures are active, sometimes passive, sometimes a combination of both.

I strongly suspect there are folks busy working on both sides of the drone issue, and that the general public will be the last to hear of their products.

DJI is supplying both measure, and counter-measure LOL.

DJI Aeroscope

I can't believe even Russia (or maybe I can) can't put a Jammer with every unit - at least vehicle mounted units. Power supply is the problem with dismounts.

This is the transition of legacy warfare into MDO.

In the modern, cyber enabled battlefield staying static equals death. Mobility is key.  Ukraine is showing what happens when those capabilities exist but lines aren't moving.

The issue with drones is that the Group 1 dropping improvised ordnance is just a tiny subset of the problem set, it just tends to get the most visibility due to social media. Its also one of the lesser hazards related to drones and one of the easier to mitigate.  The reality is that there is so much worse out there, and using drones to drop 40mm grenades is completely overshadowed by using them for rocket artillery FDC.

At the end of the day the only solution is concealment and displacement. Don't be seen in any spectrum, visual or EM, and have commensurate countermeasures looking for the enemy in those same spectrum.

You aren't armoring your way out of an MDO threat.

Jamming works against some things, doesn't against others. The one constant is that emitting large amounts of RF energy on the battlefield is the equivalent of sending up a huge red star cluster in the EMS, so its use is very situational.

Stepping aside from OP's personal protection-based premise for a moment, and not being an Expert on drones, it seems to me that Detection is essential to any drone-directed countermeasures.  Of course, this is tangential to localized drone countermeasures, such as camo and overhead cover.

Small drones, capable of dropping a grenade down through a tank's hatch, or into an open-topped dugout are harder to detect than a larger drone capable of both longer range and larger payload.  The larger the drone, the more easily it is detected.

What with all the rockets and artillery being used in Ukraine, it is small wonder that troops seek to "dig-in" on static fronts, or even when in "temporary" positions, to avoid becoming casualties.  OTOH, this static positioning also makes them better targets for ARTY and being targeted by drone reconnaissance or armed drones.

I think we are in very "early days" as concerns both drones, their capabilities, and countermeasures.  Much akin to WW 1 early tanks.

Detecting highly mobile and rapidly moving (in all 3 planes) drones will be a tough technical problem.

After detecting the drones, comes suitable and effective countermeasures.  Perhaps electronically based, such as jamming, perhaps with localized kinetic countermeasures.

Again, no Expert. Just applying what I believe to be common sense.

Without effective drone countermeasures, drones certainly have been highly effective so far.

That is likely to change, both back-and-forth, as time goes on.

Directly responding to OP's personal protection inquiry, I (not being an Expert) would think that soft body armor might be more effective against the lairly small and low-weight grenades commonly dropped from drones.  Of course, overhead shelter and actually moving plays a part.  NOT being there when the grenade is being dropped is highly effective.

If a grenade is dropped into the open hatch of a tank, it not likely any personal armor will help much, although flame resistant garments might minimize the personal damage to some of the crew, assuming they can quickly exit the vehicle.  

Like most folks, I can "imagine" how to "protect" open turret hatches.  No telling how such measures might work, but I reckon such have already been tried.

As an aside, "open hatches" on tanks are not just for occupant visibility, but due to hot it gets inside the vehicle.   A good point in favor of some sort of air-conditioning/heat reduction inside the tank/vehicle.

From what I've heard, and with reasonable caveats (not an Expert), hard armor plates are of best use against bullets, and soft armor of best use against ARTY/grenade frag.

What armor (soft/hard/both/none) one chooses should be chosen given consideration to one's likely threat.  Trade-offs with any armor platform.

Peel the skin of the onion back some.

The drone remote control is a radio-TV signal emitter (as is the drone's on-board camera and data link).  Current battlefield countermeasures don't address these.

Small drones must be relatively close to the target (a few miles/kilometers).  They don't necessarily have antennae and bandwidth to reach back to Creech, Nevada via satlink like big drones.

Jam, disrupt, or spoof the signal and the visual link goes blind and you can affect navigation and steering linkage.

Blanket jamming affects BOTH friendly and enemy command and control.

That's the problem.  Not an Expert, but both sides apparently use drones using same components and radio freqs.  Blanket jamming affects all drones.

I reckon that radio-type folks are hard at work to make drones that are resistant to electronic jamming, and also figuring out ways to jam enemy drones.  Using unconventional guidance freqs and "other" measures are certainly being investigated by both sides.  

Same thing as the Allied/German "radar wars" during WW2.  Allies won this crucial aspect both in the air, and on the seas against the U-boats.

Same thing likely to be happening now concerning drones.

This is incorrect.

Jamming considerably more nuanced than flipping a switch and killing everything between 0 -12 ghz.

The term "Drones" (or more correctly UAS) covers 5 groups from handheld to global hawk, operating through hundreds, if not thousands of unique frequencies and techniques.  Certain mitigations affect some, but don't affect others at all.  Just because something is electronic does not mean jamming is an option.

I'm not about to have an open source jamming symposium but at its base level carving the problem into one single subset (Militarized COTS) the aircraft often operate on common use bands which are currently being used for communications and C2 in conflicts such as Ukraine. Blue on blue EW fratricide is a very real thing. On the other side of the coin, EMS targeting is a very real thing also.

Things like waypoint flight, topographic scan guidance, repeaters, C2 handoffs, and about a thousand other variables make this a problem that isn't going to be solved much less understood here.

At the end of the day, the threat of drone dropped grenades is factored in along with the threat of TBM attacks, OWA strikes, off route mines, and everything else that have defined the Ukraine conflict. The lessons we are pulling from that are pretty extensive, things like the importance of A2AD,  SHORAD, EMS footprint, hybrid conflict, etc.  One thing that I have yet to see come up on our side is weighing people and vehicles down with even more armor.

... and distance and output also affect area coverage.

Always interesting to see self-proclaimed "experts " using clouds of acronyms, thus obfuscating their remarks with deliberate acronym usage/confusion.

Common usage (and decent manners) requires that when using an abbreviation, acronym, "code word" or similar, the poster explains the term(s) in plain English at first usage so that the reader can fully understand what follows.

If such people want their remarks to be fully understood--and properly evaluated--perhaps they should explain their acronyms so that all of us can understand them.

It wouldn't make the slightest difference to you if I did anyway.  



I addressed the issue.  I dont recall you asking any questions for me to answer.

I provided a response based on experience with this problem, if anyone needed their hands held through the discussion I would assume it wouldn't be the person who just provided 4 lengthy posts about the topic it seems he knows nothing about.

This hasn't been an expectation in an online conversation in a very long time. Because Google.

I agree with the notion that a small drone dropping a mortar is far less of a concern than accurate spotting for IDF. Camo nets, comms black outs, and constant mobility are exhausting but would be my first looks before extra armor. Then air to air hunter/killer drones with baby stingers, that'd be cool.

Most drones are very low power transmitters. Also the ability with some 3d printers, 3 servos and a pixhawk controller build auto tracking highly directional antennas. It significantly reduces the signature back to the base station. C2 link is almost always separated from the video link. Also for stationary targets automated waypoint drop missions elevate the issues with C2 links. Fire up drone, disable loss link return, upload flight plan, fire motors, put into Auto mode, turn off remote. You can have telemetry radios and C2 link off of it.

I do R&D on non weaponized drones. So there is a lot that can be done, so seeing this evolution of drone warfare always has me thinking. Attached File


One of my personal large drones.

Also some food for thought. Raspberry Pi microcomputer with computer vision can be made to identify, classify, and move onto a target with a 90 degree gimbal angle and activate a drop. This is easy enough to do for someone with a high technical skill set. This would allow flight without a C2(Command and Control) link. Also laser altimeters and optical flow sensors can allow flight in GPS denied locations. Automated missions would require GPS unless making it fly around until it finds something to attack.

Has me rethink getting a non ballistic helmet that is for sure.

https://www.everythingrf.com/community/what-are-controlled-reception-pattern-antennas

Nothing personal at all Raf but you occasionally do choose some odd things to pick at man.

There are so many layers of complexity to this topic (and it's multitude of sub-topics), and they are all deep enough it would be almost impossible to explain the details (acronyms or not) in a manner digestible to anyone without a fair base of knowledge to start with.  It's not to say most people aren't smart enough to understand it, it's that it would take a large amount of dedication to actually do so.  

The answers often seem nebulous because the actual problems are anything but static.  

I would say after reading daemon's posts they are the best you are going to get here, and represent what I would expect from someone who worked at AWG IIRC.

@stanprophet09

Do you think they make sense as a battlefield logistics solution? For example, how many ammo cans and MRE boxes could that hexcopter lift and how far could it actually carry them?

I think this is one specific example of one side reacting to the other side's perceived weakness, i.e., being in a static pos, with no overhead cover (especially open tank hatches).  The minute you react to it, a smart enemy moves on to another technique, and keeps you reacting to them.  So adding more armor for one threat only works until they come up with the next threat.  As big D said, the best solution is not to be there in the first place, i.e., mobility.  

There are so many permutations on the battlefield, much like a good boxer has many punches; the trick is to mix them up and keep the enemy off-guard and guessing.  The minute you start worrying about defenses against them, instead of landing your own punch, you start to lose.  So at an operational level, you focus on the other guy's weaknesses and how to exploit them.  But at a tactical level, sure, the grunt may react by re-arranging his pro to suit the current threat.  Or stop doing stupid shit that got his buddies killed.  As much as he is able.

Someone mentioned radar from WWII.  That's a very good comparison.  Older, traditional minds (who fought the last war) ignored it and got hammered.  Then they reacted to it, and the measures/countermeasures battle began.  That battle culminated over the skies of Vietnam, and ultimately resulted in stealth technology.  So where drones take us, or end up, who knows.  In the case of radar, so much was dedicated to defeating it, through brute force jamming, that it became apparent the best approach was to reduce it's ability to detect you in the first place.  In other words, attack the problem from the other end.  Perhaps something similar will happen here.  

Are you on the USA Devcom's Technology Use & Forecasts Biweekly Digest

There had a couple of pieces on this very subject

No, but I was just down at DEVCOM so I'm going to ask them why I'm not.  

Ok, think we have an SME here

That is pretty awesome! Being a ham I use a lot of antenna pattern signal rejection and notch filtering. For much of what I do it is a moot point. But we never know what we may run into in the future. I may look at doing some self funded R&D on something like that.

That DJI aeroscope looks like the ticket. Amazing how fast technology advances.

My hot take on it is that it really repeals some of the prior doctrine coming out of A-Stan and Iraq on protection.

Many favored low drag high speed, sporting nothing more than a front and rear plate and MAYBE a side plate, or MAYBE some side soft armor.

If I were in Ukraine, I'd feel the older BALCS style rigs that had a lot of soft armor would be favorable considering the threat of frag.

History continues to show we prepare for the last war, only for the next one to be different.

That said, I'm personally cautious to apply too many learnings from Ukraine to my personal preps for this very reason. But I've always felt that since my preps are defensive rather than offensive, having more armor than less is more aligned with my needs.

So approximately 20 minutes of flight time with a 50lb payload capacity. Practical I do not know. Honestly, smaller drones like the Mini 3 would be great for overall recon. At 400 feet is would be hard to hear and see, the large ones sound like a helo flying. The large ones could be helpful for other applications, some of what I will not talk about on an open forum. Right now its tough because with a full battery complement, the drone is overweight. I also have Hybrid motors that I can mount on them, honestly, FAA regulations hold back a lot of R&D work, one of the reasons the US is far behind on innovation for multi-rotor aircraft.

Keep in mind bigger drone bigger target, and easier to hit.

I'm willing to bet that some research is being done towards "quietening" the blades of most drones.  The ones I've heard, then seen, were detected by their noise first.

Detecting drones by other means, such as by radar or the drone's Electro-Magnetic Signature (EMS) is another thing, but I reckon some outlying troops might not have such detectors.  No Expert.

I've got a DJI Mini 2 and a Hubsan Zino Mini Pro (to fly wherever I want, F "safe zones" ) - I swapped props to AirScrewTM, they actually are a bit quieter. Roger the height/speed with 250g drones... I lose visual all the time at 250+...and I know
where it is.

Check out toroidal propellers.

Some kevlar skirt that velcros under a battle belt and drapes down just past the groin, might be a good weight/protection balancing solution. Covers important areas that are hard to treat if frag gets in, but doesn't impede leg movement so you can still run.

Combat diapers already exist.

I wore it on one mission, then threw it in the pelican. I kept the underwear that came with it that had the soft armor pocket over the femorals and I actually wear that a lot.

You can't still run while wearing a soft armor diaper.

I've only seen them a handful of times.  I laughed at them-it fit well with the IOTV and the idea behind all the extra crap added to it.  Armor a guy up so much that he can't move.

The open hatch drops always get me. It's not hot in Ukraine so don't think it's that, plus a lot of the vids are at night and vehicles look Unmanned.

So I'd definitely have an SOP to keep hatches closed on parked vehicles.

More overhead cover, grenade sumps, camo, and cope screens. Ie, stuff we did in ww2, mostly

Yes, that and other approaches.

No Expert, but most Soviet/Russian tanks do not have any sort of internal "full-vehicle" air conditioning, although I could certainly be wrong.  That being the case, heat buildup within the tank becomes problematic and hatches are opened simply to vent internal heat, as well as to provide external vision.  Such vehicles may have had CBN filters, but that is not the same thing as air-conditioning.  Questionable if such filters/gaskets are currently effective.

It would be extremely problematic to retro-fit "full-vehicle" air conditioning to most Soviet/Russian armored vehicles, as that would require a Lot of money and a complete re-working of existing vehicle to do so.

Again, no Expert, just applying common sense.  YMMV.

I agree, Sov stuff does not have A/C (maybe that's why they all pile on the outside), but again, the environment makes it less needed and yet they still have hatches open on unmanned vehicles, at night, etc.

I could see the proliferation of drones + advances in new lightweight IIIA leading to more armor coverage. They now have IIIA that ~0.85lb/sf and only 0.19" thick.

Sort of like a Kevlar Kilt / Kevlar Samurai outfit where theres a vest, then a sort of kevlar skirt that extends from belt down to knees.



Goal is to protect groin / thighs / femoral artery from frag. Most of the drone dropped 30/40mm seems to be leg/groin wounds.

No tanks have A/C.

Very few, if any, Modern AFVs have full-scale air conditioning for the crew, but that is likely to change in future AFVs due to the increasing amount of heat-sensitive computers/electronics required.  Some modern tanks have added some sort of "heat management" for critical components --but not the crew.

Adding full-scale internal air conditioning for the crew onto an existing tank or AFV is a significant undertaking.

This is all you really need, and about the maximum that I will wear when already loaded down.

Attached File

Are those IIIA? I had though those were more for stopping high velocity sand grains from damaging the groin, not steel fragments?

The advantage of the Kevlar Kilt is that it would a less hot / disgusting then a pair of kevlar undies, and give a much greater degree of protection.

With modern materials weight addition would be less then one might imagine. Using Stealth Armor's RZLA IIIA as an example, a 10"x12" SAPI sized groin protector weights 10.5oz / 0.65lbs.

https://stealtharmorsystems.com/shop/ols/products/the-razor-light-iiia-extreme-plate-backers-sets-and-kits

Figure about 6 of those would be 3.9lbs and provide 360 degree coverage from beltline to a bit above the knee.

...

The limitation to the concept is that 'frag protection' is very distance related. From an old Rheinmetall brochure, their hand grenades will defeat IIIA+2mm Aluminum plate within 2-2.5m. But by 3-5m away the frags will be stopped by IIIA.

Given the accuracy of these drone dropped grenades, theres many times they land well within 2-2.5m.

Excellent video on how simple netting can save your life from small drones:

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1356c2l/russian_kamikaze_drone_gets_stuck_in_a_net_over/

The PUG has like 5 different vendors. The only one ive been issued is the yellow Crye set, and has soft armor to protect your femoral only.  My main concern was IEDs when I was wearing them.

I don't know anyone that is going to wear something loose like flaps or a "kilt" that can get caught in doors or snagged on things.  I wont.  

I assume risk based on probability of threat and risk to force/risk to mission.  Honestly this drone grenade threat is a thing, but it's vastly overblown in its prevalence on the battlefield.  It was around when I was in Syria fighting ISIS, but a lot of other higher impact threats were too.  Same as Ukraine.  The drone threat is huge, but the weaponized COTS piece is only a small part of it.  It is the best social media PR though, as both ISIS and Ukraine have found.

The Skydio X2D and X2E are very quiet. Check out the Freefly Alta X, for a large drone they are quiet as well.

I have been rethinking my load out due to frag we are seeing in Ukraine from drone dropped munitions. I have a bunch of level 4 plus plates that were taken out of Ford Taurus cop cars, they were starting to delaminate and Ford replaced them under warranty, they never called them back so I got the parts department to let me have them. Need to figure out some good uses for them.

It also has me thinking more about thermal camo. I have the IR portion covered. Lots to think about and many other things that have yet to be seen.

I’m curious what your field/tactical experience is that you think this would be worth it? I don’t know a single person that likes shit on their legs aside from maybe a holster. Maybe. A full weighted kilt? Hell no.

Wearing armor is a hassle. More armor is more of a hassle.

But I've probably watched 100+ drone drop videos from first Syria and now Ukraine. With a ground impacting 30mm or 40mm VOG, the vast majority of the wounds look to be fragmentation to the legs.

So if one is talking about shifting focus from rifle plates to more frag protection, then it stands to reason to focus on protecting areas that are actually receiving the most frag.

Yeah, I've only ridden in Amtracks and they don't have shit. Ridden on top of tanks, but not in them.

I thought the Army had cooling vests that hook up to a chilled water system in the tank, but maybe that was an experiment.

The only thing I ever heard of were guys using something in Strykers, maybe something to do with fire suppression or something? You could activate it to get cold air but obviously depleted it for its primary use. Might have been CBRN related.