Chinese UAVs News & Discussions

[Vi-va]

The Chinese anti-drone laser weapon system that recently showed up in Iran, it's on AliExpress for $1999/set. It is very cheap to use.
Batteries and piggybacking platforms of your choice depending on the situation

laser has some shortcomings:
Counter drone range is from hundreds of meters to 1-3 km I suppose.
Expensive
Can't deal with swarm
Can't deal with Loitering Munition covered by armour
Hard to deal with high speed target, like 3 mach, or higher.

Munition like SDB, can easily penetrate laser defense.

I still feel that having a small swarm of UAVs over your head to protect against enemy drones would be a much more effective and cheaper solution.

Agree. I believe swarm of UAV with some sort of binocular vision, small radar, AI, and combined with some kind of Ladar on the launcher have higher potentials.

You can't deal with 100 UAV in the same time, or very high speed targets by laser. But you can use 100+ UAV to deal with both 100 UAV and very high speed targets.

The civil tech is moving forward much faster than military, and the per unit cost is so much lower.

Electronic jamming, laser weapons, CIWS are needed also. But swarm is the way to go I think.

@Michael small drones are very cheap, tens of bucks each.

 

[Michael]

laser has some shortcomings:
Counter drone range is from hundreds of meters to 1-3 km I suppose.
Expensive
Can't deal with swarm
Can't deal with Loitering Munition covered by armour
Hard to deal with high speed target, like 3 mach, or higher.

Munition like SDB, can easily penetrate laser defense.
View attachment 72838



Agree. I believe swarm of UAV with some sort of binocular vision, small radar, AI, and combined with some kind of Ladar on the launcher have higher potentials.

You can't deal with 100 UAV in the same time, or very high speed targets by laser. But you can use 100+ UAV to deal with both 100 UAV and very high speed targets.

The civil tech is moving forward much faster than military, and the per unit cost is so much lower.

Electronic jamming, laser weapons, CIWS are needed also. But swarm is the way to go I think.

@Michael small drones are very cheap, tens of bucks each.

View attachment 72841

View attachment 72842

View attachment 72843

For drone defense, it's a three-dimensional defense system.
Laser defense system mainly targets low altitude slow speed UAVs;
CIWS mainly targets low altitude high speed drones or missiles;
Higher and larger drones are where air defense missiles come into play.
Loitering Munition is the working range of CIWS.

As for this micro-drone you posted, think about it for a moment. How far can it fly? How much ammo can it carry? How much damage can those munitions do? ------ Civilian drones can indeed be military, but you need to consider its range and ammo capacity.

As for swarm drones to intercept swarm drones. That doesn't follow basic military logic. It is only possible in extreme situations.
Intercepting attacking drones with drones, these intercepting drones are just much more advanced than the attacking drones in terms of flight speed\attack accuracy\flight time\number of drones and other data.
If I have so many more advanced drones, why don't I use them for offense, but choose to use them for defense?

The Russian-Ukrainian war was indeed a battlefield for drones. But for the most part, this war is still a “security war”, and both sides have very limited capabilities. This is completely different from the high-intensity wars that PLA plans to face in the future. Perhaps this war has more value for PAP.

Here are the PLAGF's active weapons for the different classes of drones.

 

[nang2]

For drone defense, it's a three-dimensional defense system.
Laser defense system mainly targets low altitude slow speed UAVs;
CIWS mainly targets low altitude high speed drones or missiles;
Higher and larger drones are where air defense missiles come into play.
Loitering Munition is the working range of CIWS.

As for this micro-drone you posted, think about it for a moment. How far can it fly? How much ammo can it carry? How much damage can those munitions do? ------ Civilian drones can indeed be military, but you need to consider its range and ammo capacity.

As for swarm drones to intercept swarm drones. That doesn't follow basic military logic. It is only possible in extreme situations.
Intercepting attacking drones with drones, these intercepting drones are just much more advanced than the attacking drones in terms of flight speed\attack accuracy\flight time\number of drones and other data.
If I have so many more advanced drones, why don't I use them for offense, but choose to use them for defense?

The Russian-Ukrainian war was indeed a battlefield for drones. But for the most part, this war is still a “security war”, and both sides have very limited capabilities. This is completely different from the high-intensity wars that PLA plans to face in the future. Perhaps this war has more value for PAP.

Here are the PLAGF's active weapons for the different classes of drones.

View attachment 72863
View attachment 72864
View attachment 72865

I was thinking more about using a swarm of UAVs as a protective canopy over an armor column or an infantry platoon. Such UAVs don't need large munition. Only need some to neutralize enemy drones. Could even be just a shortgun bullet. Ideally, these drones could be either high flying and looking down to hunt kamikaze drones or low flying and looking up to hunt recon drones.

In the end, the situation would be just drones against drones, artillery against artillery, armor against armor, infantry against infantry, etc.

 

[Michael]

I was thinking more about using a swarm of UAVs as a protective canopy over an armor column or an infantry platoon. Such UAVs don't need large munition. Only need some to neutralize enemy drones. Could even be just a shortgun bullet. Ideally, these drones could be either high flying and looking down to hunt kamikaze drones or low flying and looking up to hunt recon drones.
In the end, the situation would be just drones against drones, artillery against artillery, armor against armor, infantry against infantry, etc.

All right. Armored units have air defense radars and anti-UAS in their formation mix. the HQ-17A or 625E, both of which are among the options for field air defense systems, are always on alert. Also, the PLAGF has position radars and various reconnaissance equipment vehicles, as well as medium/high altitude long-endurance drones policing the skies.

Your scenario won't work.
You can't know in advance when an enemy drone is coming to attack you. All swarm drones have a short operating time. You can't have your defensive swarm drones hovering over you all the time. When you find out that an enemy swarm drone is coming to attack you, it's too late to defend yourself, whether it's a mother drone in the sky or a takeoff drone on the ground.
If you have medium/high altitude drones that can spot the enemy far in advance, why don't you just drop a bomb on them while they're still preparing their swarm drones? It would certainly be more effective than you releasing suicide drones to attack their swarm drones.

 

[nang2]

All right. Armored units have air defense radars and anti-UAS in their formation mix. the HQ-17A or 625E, both of which are among the options for field air defense systems, are always on alert. Also, the PLAGF has position radars and various reconnaissance equipment vehicles, as well as medium/high altitude long-endurance drones policing the skies.

Your scenario won't work.
You can't know in advance when an enemy drone is coming to attack you. All swarm drones have a short operating time. You can't have your defensive swarm drones hovering over you all the time. When you find out that an enemy swarm drone is coming to attack you, it's too late to defend yourself, whether it's a mother drone in the sky or a takeoff drone on the ground.
If you have medium/high altitude drones that can spot the enemy far in advance, why don't you just drop a bomb on them while they're still preparing their swarm drones? It would certainly be more effective than you releasing suicide drones to attack their swarm drones.

Have you checked out those combat videos from Ukraine battlefield? Armor columns seldom have air defense unit in the mix and AD unit cannot function on the move. It is very rare to have more than a dozen armor vehicles in an armor advance. Infantry attacking is even more interesting. Usually an attack group only has 2 soldiers. Only recently, Russia has increased that size to 3.

All of this is because of the ubiquitous UAV / artillery threats. Throwing HQ-17A against those drones will bankrupt you quickly.

 

[Michael]

Have you checked out those combat videos from Ukraine battlefield? Armor columns seldom have air defense unit in the mix and AD unit cannot function on the move. It is very rare to have more than a dozen armor vehicles in an armor advance. Infantry attacking is even more interesting. Usually an attack group only has 2 soldiers. Only recently, Russia has increased that size to 3.

All of this is because of the ubiquitous UAV / artillery threats. Throwing HQ-17A against those drones will bankrupt you quickly.

Dude, we're talking about Chinese drones & anti-UAS, not Russia or Ukraine.

Russian and Ukrainian battlefield drones can be easily dealt with by laser defense systems and 625E CIWS, both of which are very cheap to use.

As I said earlier, Russian/Ukrainian drones and anti-drone systems are not in the same class as China. Their UAV attack/defense experience helps PLAGF a bit, but not much. That experience is more suited to PAP than PLAGF. ------ There are some similarities between how PLAGF special operations brigades and PAP special operations brigades operate, and they often learn from each other.

PLAGF has a more comprehensive and larger UAS, they have the ability to strike before the enemy launches a massive swarm drone attack, and they also have far more extensive anti-drone systems than Russia/Ukraine.

The HQ-17A primarily targets aircraft and missiles, but also large high altitude drones. For smaller swarm drones it uses the fragmentation Loitering Munition, where a single missile can take out a swarm of swarm drones. It's not the same concept.

You can read more about how PLAGF has changed now.PLAGF has phased out light infantry troopers, do you know what that means? For combat missions that require soldiers to walk long distances, that's the PLAGF Special Operations Brigade. They have been equipped with man-portable phased array radar and those operating swarm drones have faced artillery coverage before they could spot them.

The PLAGF border guards on the India-China border are the worst equipped PLAGF troops. You can look for news and pictures of them. There is a very big gap between the Russian/Ukrainian armies and them, not to mention the main PLAGF units.

 

[nang2]

Dude, we're talking about Chinese drones & anti-UAS, not Russia or Ukraine.

Russian and Ukrainian battlefield drones can be easily dealt with by laser defense systems and 625E CIWS, both of which are very cheap to use.

As I said earlier, Russian/Ukrainian drones and anti-drone systems are not in the same class as China. Their UAV attack/defense experience helps PLAGF a bit, but not much. That experience is more suited to PAP than PLAGF. ------ There are some similarities between how PLAGF special operations brigades and PAP special operations brigades operate, and they often learn from each other.

PLAGF has a more comprehensive and larger UAS, they have the ability to strike before the enemy launches a massive swarm drone attack, and they also have far more extensive anti-drone systems than Russia/Ukraine.

The HQ-17A primarily targets aircraft and missiles, but also large high altitude drones. For smaller swarm drones it uses the fragmentation Loitering Munition, where a single missile can take out a swarm of swarm drones. It's not the same concept.

You can read more about how PLAGF has changed now.PLAGF has phased out light infantry troopers, do you know what that means? For combat missions that require soldiers to walk long distances, that's the PLAGF Special Operations Brigade. They have been equipped with man-portable phased array radar and those operating swarm drones have faced artillery coverage before they could spot them.

The PLAGF border guards on the India-China border are the worst equipped PLAGF troops. You can look for news and pictures of them. There is a very big gap between the Russian/Ukrainian armies and them, not to mention the main PLAGF units.

As I said, I don't have much confidence in those that are not battle tested. I know some Chinese systems have been used by Saudi. But considering its record in the battles with Houthis, I am not impressed. Chinese systems largely follow the lead of American systems. The latter seems to only work well against those without much of military industry of their own. I am afraid that Chinese systems would follow the same pattern. Russia, on the other hand, is famous in creating cheap, ugly but effective weapons.

 

[Michael]

As I said, I don't have much confidence in those that are not battle tested. I know some Chinese systems have been used by Saudi. But considering its record in the battles with Houthis, I am not impressed. Chinese systems largely follow the lead of American systems. The latter seems to only work well against those without much of military industry of their own. I am afraid that Chinese systems would follow the same pattern. Russia, on the other hand, is famous in creating cheap, ugly but effective weapons.

Your ID shows that your Country of Origin is China and Country of Residence is USA. I am not sure if you are American or Chinese(Chinese American?).
So, I am not clear in what way to express to you.

Chinese people are realists, he will learn all the knowledge in the world that he thinks is useful, but he will not develop exactly according to other people's thinking logic, he has his own thinking logic. This is the biggest headache western society has with China.

China used to learn military knowledge from USSR/Russia, now it learns military knowledge from USA. But China is not developing exactly according to the logic of US military thinking. He will learn all he can, but only adopt what he thinks is useful to him.

The US military spent a huge amount of money to develop the Jumwalt destroyer, which China chose to develop the 055 destroyer after observing and analyzing it for a long time.
The US military's Tri-Hull Littoral Combat Ship, China built a Tri-Hull Rescue Ship and stopped development.
China had Harrier Jet in 1996, China has the ability to build its own STOVL fighter by reverse research. But China has never done so.
There are plenty of examples of this

So, you can't analyze China with other countries.

 

[nang2]

Your ID shows that your Country of Origin is China and Country of Residence is USA. I am not sure if you are American or Chinese(Chinese American?).
So, I am not clear in what way to express to you.

Chinese people are realists, he will learn all the knowledge in the world that he thinks is useful, but he will not develop exactly according to other people's thinking logic, he has his own thinking logic. This is the biggest headache western society has with China.

China used to learn military knowledge from USSR/Russia, now it learns military knowledge from USA. But China is not developing exactly according to the logic of US military thinking. He will learn all he can, but only adopt what he thinks is useful to him.

The US military spent a huge amount of money to develop the Jumwalt destroyer, which China chose to develop the 055 destroyer after observing and analyzing it for a long time.
The US military's Tri-Hull Littoral Combat Ship, China built a Tri-Hull Rescue Ship and stopped development.
China had Harrier Jet in 1996, China has the ability to build its own STOVL fighter by reverse research. But China has never done so.
There are plenty of examples of this

So, you can't analyze China with other countries.

If you haven't learnt to communicate solely based on the subject and the facts related and have a habit of drawing conclusion based on identities, you are going to run any serious discussion into the ground.

 

[yusheng]

for Someone who does not know much about PLAPLA's new PGL-625 self-propelled anti-aircraft gun is equipped with a 6-tube 25mm rotary cannon and 8 HN-6 anti-aircraft missiles or FB-10A short-range air defense missile. it can attack ground targets too.

 

[Michael]

If you haven't learnt to communicate solely based on the subject and the facts related and have a habit of drawing conclusion based on identities, you are going to run any serious discussion into the ground.

This response of yours reminds me of a story from years ago.

A female Chinese student studying in Japan. One day, she was on a bus going to school when she saw a Japanese grandmother who had no seat. So she took the initiative to get up and offer her seat to the grandmother and asked her to rest in her seat. However, the Chinese female student was complained by the Japanese grandmother. The reason for the Japanese grandmother's complaint was. The Chinese female student discriminated her as an elderly person ......​

At this moment, I feel like I am like this Chinese schoolgirl who was castigated.

I inquired about your identity to better communicate with you, not for any other purpose, much less with malice.

China's military situation is not fully publicized, and not much is known even by native-born Chinese. But the native-born Chinese know a lot about the logic of PLA thinking and fighting spirit. For this group, I just need to tell them some of the PLA's current weapon systems, without having to explain the PLA's reasons for doing so.
Overseas Chinese. Generally don't know much about China's current military situation, and most of their perceptions are still stuck in decades ago.
Some overseas Chinese still retain traditional Chinese thinking logic. For them, I just need to provide more information about the current situation, without having to explain the difference in thinking logic due to the difference in thinking culture.
Some overseas Chinese have fully integrated into western thinking logic. For them, I can only explain it exactly the way I would explain it to a Westerner. Starting from a completely different military combat thinking logic and analyzing it until a different weaponry system is formed.

I still don't know if my explanation makes the situation clearer or further deepens the misunderstanding ...........

 

[yusheng]

Shanghai Aerospace's "Sleeve Sword" mini missile. Compared to the "spear", the "sleeve sword" has a slight advantage in size and weight, with a length of still 0.5 meters but an increased bullet diameter of 6 centimeters, and a launch weight of 4 kilograms (2.5 kilograms for the missile body and approximately 1.5 kilograms for the launch device). Its maximum range has been increased to 3 kilometers and its maximum shooting height is 2000 meters. Adopting television or infrared imaging guidance system, with automatic target matching function, it can automatically detect, track, identify and lock targets, surpassing the technical level of "spear".


The Sleeve Sword missile adopts TV guidance or infrared imaging guidance, which can automatically detect, track, identify, and lock targets. Its intelligence level is very high. It is a small-sized, lightweight, but highly capable missile. A soldier can carry up to 12 missiles in two backpacks, with a total weight of only 31.5 kilograms.
The Sleeve Sword Missile is a miniature multi-purpose missile positioned as a precision strike weapon for individual soldiers. It is cheaper and more flexible to use than current portable anti tank missiles and portable air defense missiles, and can be equipped in large quantities. It is more accurate than current individual weapons such as rifles, machine guns, submachine guns, sniper rifles, grenade launchers, mortars, etc. It can greatly improve the firepower, accuracy, and range of individual soldier attacks in the army, fundamentally changing the history of individual soldier firepower in the army!
The key to the large-scale production and use of individual micro missiles lies in the cost. If the cost is too expensive and not worth the loss, its development prospects will be constrained. The Americans were the first to invent the spear missile. However, they finally found that the development of this weapon system was not cost-effective, so they slowed down the pace of research and development. So far, no large number of weapons have been installed.
However, the Chinese came from behind and built the sleeve arrow missile in only six years. At present, they have received many orders. This weapon system can only be mass-produced and used in China.

 

[yusheng]

another type：China QN-202 Mini Missile System

 

[Michael]

another type：China QN-202 Mini Missile System
View attachment 73014View attachment 73015View attachment 73016View attachment 73017View attachment 73018View attachment 73019

It's been out for a few years now, and is said to be the smallest missile in the world.

But, I think this thing should be mounted on a UAV or robot dog, not carried by a soldier. It's attack range already puts the soldier in a dangerous situation, and being carried by a UAV or robot dog would further increase it's attack range and make the soldier safer.

 

[yusheng]

It's been out for a few years now, and is said to be the smallest missile in the world.

But, I think this thing should be mounted on a UAV or robot dog, not carried by a soldier. It's attack range already puts the soldier in a dangerous situation, and being carried by a UAV or robot dog would further increase it's attack range and make the soldier safer.

you are correct.
things are changing constantly. and environments are complex. these missiles can be used as close defence as well. such as antiUAV. it is said that 202 now has air defence capa