Latest news with #UkrainianNationalGuard
Daily Mail
24-06-2025
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Ukrainian commandos 'sent inexperienced Brit, 20, on "suicide mission" into no-man's land then left his body to rot after he was cut down by Russian fire'
Ukrainian commandos sent an inexperienced British fighter on a 'suicide mission' before leaving his body to rot in no-man's-land, his heartbroken mother has claimed. Colby Dolman, 20, was killed when his unit was cut down by Russian fire as they joined forces aiming to liberate the village of Mali Scherbaky in Zaporizhia Oblast, south east Ukraine. The former carpenter, from Cleethorpes, Lincs, had been in Ukraine just over a year when he was sent on a number of abortive missions alongside more experienced soldiers in an offensive mounted by the National Guard of Ukraine. Speaking exclusively to MailOnline, his mother, Tara Benford, 37, said: 'He should never have been sent out, he did not have the experience or the training, it was a suicide mission. 'He was one of four young men who died side by side and they have been left to rot on the battlefield, as far as we are aware he is where he fell more than a month ago. 'It is heartbreaking. Myself, his stepfather and his seven-year-old brother will have no peace or comfort until his body is returned to us but we simply don't know where to turn. 'We have had no help from the Ukrainian authorities. They were happy to have Colby's help when he signed up to train and fight alongside them because he wanted to make a difference in the world. 'But this is the thanks he receives, he is killed on a mission he should never have been sent on and left where he lay. 'I have terrible nightmares where I dream of him lying there and reaching out for help from me or anyone who can just bring him home. It is unbearable.' The family have now launched a GoFundMe appeal to try to raise £6,000 to bring Colby's body home, saying no help has come from Ukrainian authorities or British officials. Colby left the UK for Ukraine on March 24th last year and began training for the Ukrainian military on his arrival in Kyiv. He had no previous experience as a fighter having been unable to win a place as a recruit in the British Army because at the time he had been prescribed an asthma inhaler. He told his mother he wanted to go and fight in the Ukraine, a prospect which horrified her. She said: 'I begged him not to go and told him he had no way of knowing what he was walking into. That is something I would now ask any parent to consider very carefully after what has happened to him. 'But he wanted to make a difference, he was angry at what was happening to the people of the Ukraine and he felt he could do something about it. He wanted to go out there and fight and ultimately he was old enough to make his own choices. 'He left last March and was in constant contact. He seemed to have found his calling in life. He was enjoying military life, had fallen in love with the country and his comrades had become great friends. 'Despite the endless worry of him being out there I was pleased to see him happy and proud that as a young man was so determined to do the right thing.' It was in autumn last year that Colby completed his training and was assigned to the Revanche Tactical Group, formed in March 2022 in response to Putin's invasion. He found himself fighting under the command of Bohdan Khodakovskyi alongside troops from around the world, including Ukrainian soldiers as well as British, American and Brazilian fighters. His family feel that although he had learnt a lot and had become a courageous soldier he was not equipped for the battles ahead. Ms Benford said: 'The mission in Mali Scherbaky seemed doomed from the start, it was the fourth offensive he had been on and I'm convinced he knew he would not be coming back from it. 'On the first offensive Revanche launched, a military vehicle was blown up causing multiple injuries, but no one died. 'In the second one, Colby was part of a team of five in which two of his comrades were killed and the mission aborted for a second time. 'The third attempt on the same village was done during darkness and they wore night vision and thermal cloaks and were moving into position when they realised there was a drone above them. 'They were trapped and there was nothing they could do. The drone dropped an explosive device which actually landed on Colby's foot, but it failed to explode. 'It shook him very badly and he sent a message to me to say 'this mission is f***ed up' and I begged him not to go back there and he promised he would not go back. 'After he died I received messages from members of his unit saying he should never have been asked to go to Mali a fourth time. He didn't have the training or the experience. 'But he was sent again and I suppose he had no option but to obey orders and move out. 'His final message to me was different to any of the others he had sent. Before that he would say 'I love you Mum, I will contact you when I get back, don't worry about me.' 'But his last message said 'the mission is 7-15 days, do not contact anybody before then.' 'I think he knew he would not be coming back and did not want me contacting his friends to ask if he was safe. 'I find it heart-breaking that he went out there feeling that way but he was in no position to refuse his orders.' Tara's partner Ashley Dolman, 35, and their son Archie Dolman, seven, received the devastating news he had been killed via a soldier from his platoon that he had been killed on May 10th. One of the four who died alongside him was Gabriel 'Benito' Ferreira Silva, a young Brazilian soldier who Revanche paid tribute to following his death. No similar tribute had been paid to Colby. It said: 'Benito' was the soul of the company – an ideological and passionate warrior. Gabriel fully embraced the religious, ethical, and ideological principles of our unit, which led him to cross thousands of kilometres from Brazil to join the fight in Ukraine. 'He trained with dedication and was always a model of discipline. Cultural barriers meant nothing to him — he immediately became one of us, fully integrated with the Ukrainian part of the unit.' Tara has pleaded for help from Labour MP from Grimsby and Cleethorpes Melanie Onn, has contact Downing Street and the British Embassy in Kyiv, all to no avail. She said: 'We are desperate for help, for someone to help bring my boy home. 'He should be here with us, playing with his younger brother and taking his dogs out in the woods. It's enough to cope with that we have lost him, but the knowledge he is still out there somewhere is more than we can stand.'
Forbes
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Forbes
Ukraine Wears Down Russian Artillery, But Drone Threat Is Growing
A destroyed Russian self-propelled gun Headlines early on in the invasion warned about the sheer power of Russian artillery, with advances following massive 'fire curtain' barrages. Russian artillery was estimated outgun Ukrainian by a factor of ten, and President Zelensky repeatedly appealed to allies for more shells. The situation has changed, but as 'Michael,' Commander of the Typhoon drone unit of the National Guard of Ukraine, told me, the artillery has not gone away -- and drones are a growing threat. Ukraine has been highly successful at countering Russian artillery. Any gun firing can be spotted by counter-artillery radar, like the U.S. -made AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder, which tracks shells in flight and calculates their source. New Ukrainian-made acoustic detectors which recently went into mass production are likely to figure increasingly. U.S. delivering two AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder radar units to Ukraine in 2015 'The radar is typically the first step. It can detect the approximate area of a firing position, but it's not precise,' says Michael. 'Depending on distance and terrain, it may narrow the location down to a 200-by-200-meter area, which is too broad for a direct strike.' Pinpointing the exact firing location is a job for the drones. 'Drones are essential for confirming the exact location of artillery,' says Michael. 'We use fixed-wing drones, some with real-time video, others capturing high-resolution photos, for wide-area reconnaissance. These platforms allow us to assess whether the artillery is still in position and provide up-to-date imagery.' Visual observation using the drone's powerful zoom cameras is usually the best way to find artillery. 'Artillery is easiest to spot when it's firing -- muzzle flashes, smoke, or movement of the crew make it visible,' says Michael. 'Also, we can identify the artillery by its silhouette, even if it's partially hidden somewhere in the trees or buildings. In covered areas, we look for signs like tracks, disturbed ground, or heat if thermal optics are available.' When a drone operator positively confirms the exact location of a Russian artillery piece, it needs to be struck rapidly before it can move. In the past this would have been a matter of counter battery fire, using artillery to destroy artillery. Now there are other options. Michael says that counter-battery fire is still used, with a drone operator giving the co-ordinates of the target to the gun crew and calling out adjustments needed to put shells on target. But much of the counter-battery work ss carried out by drones. 'FPV drones, both quadcopters and fixed-wing types, have become more effective than traditional artillery in terms of precision engagement,' says Michael. 'A high-quality FPV drone for now is the most effective way to destroy the artillery system.' Ukrainian volunteers with DARTS fixed-wing FPV Several different types are used depending on the range, with fixed-wing FPVs typically having longer reach. Surprisingly, drones are preferred because they are faster. It is highly counter-intuitive that 100 mph drone will reach a target quicker than a 700-mph artillery shell, but what counts is how long it takes to hit the target. 'With FPV drones, even though the flight time can be minutes depending on the distance, the first strike often hits,' Michael explains. 'With artillery it often takes several rounds to hit the target, especially in dynamic conditions.' Dynamic conditions may mean a situation where a self-propelled gun fires off a few rounds and speeds away down a track. An artillery shell arriving after thirty seconds will miss by hundreds of meters. A drone which arrives later can spot the vehicle, follow it, and carry out a precision strike. Towed guns are less likely to get away. But they are harder targets because they are not packed with fuel and ammunition like self-propelled guns. A follow-up FPV from Bords of Magyar inspects damage to a Russian howitzer, confirming the barrel ... More has been perforated making the weapon useless 'To effectively disable them, you have to hit specific parts—like the breech, recoil system, or the towing vehicle,' says Michael. The preferred technique has been previously seen in videos from the Birds of Magyar unit, with FPV drones hovering a few inches away from a gun barrel before detonating. Scoring a hit requires a high level of operator skill as well as a robust technical setup. 'Maintaining a reliable video signal is critical.' says Michael. 'Without a stable connection between the drone and ground operator, it's hard to carry out the kind of pinpoint strike needed for such a small target,' Fiber drones, which provide a high-resolution image and are not affected by interference or terrain, and which Ukraine is starting to deploy at scale, may help with this. Afterwards reconnaissance drones can confirm whether a kill has been scored or whether further action is required. But while Ukraine claims to have destroyed a large number of Russian artillery pieces, a claim supported by the rate at which the stockpiles in Russia are being depleted, the Russians are still able to maintain a significant artillery forced at the front. Some 2024 estimates suggested that Russia might start running low this year, it has not happened yet. Ukraine's Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi says Russia's long-range striking power has been halved, but on the front line there are still plenty of shells coming down. 'Their artillery remains a serious and ongoing threat,' says Michael. And while Ukrainian interceptors have brought down thousands of the Russian reconnaissance drones that find targets for their artillery, these are still also very much present. 'As for Russian recon drones, there's no sign of a shortage,' says Michael. 'Recon drones are constantly present in the air.' Meanwhile another sort of drone is giving more concern. The Russian group Sudoplatov produces large numbers of FPVs 'What has changed is the rise in the use of FPV drones,' says Michael. 'Currently, we're observing several hundred FPV strikes per day. These drones are increasingly taking over roles that would have traditionally involved artillery fire, especially for high-precision or time-sensitive targets.' [My emphasis] What is interesting here is that many commentators have argued that Ukraine only uses drones because it lacks artillery. Now it seems that Russia, which still seems to have abundant artillery, is also leaning increasingly into drones for long-range strikes. Like Ukraine, Russia has been ramping up FPV production at pace, and plans to build 2 million in 2025, compared to 3 million artillery shells. At this rate, both countries will soon be fielding more FPVs than artillery shells. Russia's artillery is rapidly being eroded as the thousands of guns in storage are put into service and destroyed. When it is gone, the days of massed firepower will have passed. But the era of massed precision drone strikes will just be beginning.
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ukrainian Commander's Exclusive Insights On Brutal Drone Warfare On The Frontline
Last October, the First Corps Azov Brigade of the Ukrainian National Guard saw the need to increase the number of drones it had and people to operate them. So it created the 12th Special Forces Brigade Azov of the Ukrainian National Guard's Unmanned Systems Battalion. It now has several hundred troops and tens of thousands of drones ranging from first-person view (FPV) variants to heavy 'bomber' types. They are fighting in and around Toretsk, a now-destroyed city in Donetsk Oblast where some of the war's fiercest battles are taking place. In a deeper dive into our nearly two-hour exclusive interview, the commander of this battalion, callsign 'Yas,' shared new details about the ever-evolving use of drones in combat. Yas addressed a huge range of issues. He told us about what is working and what is not, Russia's new battlefield tactics, the problem with 'dragon drones,' how they are putting their new fixed-wing SETH drones to use, how combat is morphing to war between robots, and why he is wary of operating unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) that are equipped with the ability to kill. The questions and answers have been slightly edited for clarity. You can catch up with his insights on the pros and cons of fiber-optic controlled first-person view (FPV) drones in our recent piece linked here. Q: Have the Russians changed the way they are operating, and if so, how? A: Yes, there are definitely changes. I cannot say that there are daily changes, but approximately every month, more or less, the enemy changes their tactics. And for example, we see fewer and fewer 'meat grinder' assaults, those cannon fodder assaults that the enemy was so famous for, and fewer motorized assaults. Instead, we see that the tactics change, and we spend more and more time trying to identify the enemy, trying to locate the enemy. So now they're using their small group tactics. They're infiltrating our positions, infiltrating our defense lines, and they are using our vulnerabilities. And I must say that from time to time, they do this successfully. Unfortunately, we still do not have a sufficient amount of reconnaissance drones in the air to cover every square meter of the territory. But the pilots of our reconnaissance drones do their best to detect the enemy and to carry out the main task. That is actually defined for our unmanned systems battalion, namely, to save as many lives of our infantrymen as possible and to prevent the infantry from entering combat, from entering the battle. Unfortunately, we are not always successful in carrying out this task, but we are doing our best. We are trying to create the so-called buffer zone, approximately one or two kilometers between the enemy lines and the positions of our infantry. And we mostly deal with striking the enemy's logistics, the enemy's communication. And in this case, we are preventing the enemy from fulfilling their aims and engaging our troops. Q: What's an attack that you are most proud of? A: I'm mostly proud not of operations, but of people conducting those operations. So I do remember one of the most notable cases. Approximately one year ago, one of our men in one of the sectors destroyed a TOS-2 [thermobaric rocket launcher] system with the unmanned system. That was really notable. Another destroyed Russian TOS-1A. Also with the help of FPV drones. By the Azov — Special Kherson Cat (@bayraktar_1love) April 3, 2024 Q: Anything more recent? A: At the moment our operations have become more of a routine for us and we just operate based on the principle that we must do this. We must get the job done. And it is quite difficult for me to single out something that is really notable for me. So even if now we have a chance to strike another TOS system, that would be just a part of our routine work. We have engaged tanks, for example. We dealt with all types of vehicles, but once again, at this particular moment, they become less and less visible. More and more concealment measures are employed, and they are usually located at larger distances, and this is why, mostly, we use more and more resources. But unfortunately, the level of efficiency decreases because the enemy also doesn't wait for us and doesn't stop their development. … We didn't really participate in any massive drone attacks, because we have quite a modest depth of operation, approximately up to 25 kilometers (about 15.5 miles) in depth. And within this area, it doesn't really make much sense to conduct massive drone strikes. So we usually establish communication with other drone teams, and we stick to the principle that two or three drones flying to strike a target are better than only one drone for this purpose. But if we are talking about a massive deployment of drones, like 10 to 20 unmanned systems, we didn't participate in such massive attacks, and we find this particular kind of drone usage quite inappropriate at our level. 54 Hits: FPV Drones Strike Russian Communication SystemsThese combat flights often remain overshadowed by the more dramatic strikes on Russian infantry. However, disrupting enemy communications, destroying repeaters, and downing reconnaissance UAVs also contribute to saving the… — First Corps Azov of the National Guard of Ukraine (@azov_media) May 8, 2025 Q: Talk about the challenges of fighting in and around Toretsk. A: At the moment, the level of the enemy's activity in this sector has risen, and the enemy advances. The enemy pushes our logistical capacities backwards. And over the recent one and a half months, approximately, the enemy uses the unmanned systems. Well, I cannot say whether it is at our level or better than us. That is a difficult thing to determine, but they're using our tactics approximately the same as us, and they are also striking our logistical capacities, and this creates a significant problem for us. The Lives and Deaths of Russian Bikers near ToretskThese invaders were among those sent into assaults as motorized from the 12th Special Forces Brigade Azov spotted a lone motorcycle advancing toward the positions of the Ukrainian Defense Forces. The two… — First Corps Azov of the National Guard of Ukraine (@azov_media) May 24, 2025 Q: Are you seeing the Russians increasing the number of drones that they have and are using? And are they outpacing you yet in terms of the number of drones you're using? A: It is difficult to say whether they are outpacing us in terms in terms of numbers. I can only tell you about the tactics…They deployed their drones along the front edge of the battle area, and the number was quite significant, so we felt that number quite well. But at this moment, I'm not so sure about the numbers that they deploy, but they are starting to deploy their drones more intelligently. They are selecting their high-value targets, their priority targets, and this is why it is quite difficult for me to talk about exact numbers. Q: How many troops have you lost in this difficult fight? A: That's war. It is impossible to fight a war without losses, and of course, we also suffered losses. But I will not disclose the exact number of troops that we have lost. For me, personally, from my perspective, the loss of every soldier is a critical loss, just from a human side of this issue. Q: Describe what it is like for the drone operators who carry out your missions. A: The process is quite complex. First, we receive the drones. We send them to our workshop to be worked on by our specialists. This has now become a complete must for us. Any freshly manufactured drone still has to be refined by our specialists, because a newly manufactured drone is frequently inefficient. After our specialists work with our drones, we transport them directly to the positions where our pilots test them once more, because there can be some malfunctions due to the transportation, conditions, etcetera, etcetera. We need to make sure that the drones are completely operational. In terms of the work of the pilots themselves, they are always monitoring their voice chat – any secure voice chat that is agreed to – and when the superior commander gives an order to lift off, they already have this drone ready. Depending on the conditions, they might have a lot of space for the drone or less space for the drone, but they always have the UAVs handy. And then a pilot switches the drone on, then gives feedback to the command that everything is fine. Then the pilot returns back to the shelter, because this creates additional protection in case, for example, there is a malfunction, or there is an explosion of the ammunition, etcetera. Only after everyone in the team takes shelter does the actual liftoff happen, and the mission starts. Basically, the pilot flies the drone, and the pilot is assisted by the navigator, and they fulfill their orders of their superiors. The pilot is also the one who is responsible for the mechanical work, and the pilot is told what to strike and where to fly, etc. With time, of course, as pilots become more and more experienced, they have a more detailed understanding of all of the aspects. But when we have new pilots, when they are just fresh from training, usually the most important role, and this is just a philosophical thought from my side, the most important work is conducted by the navigator, because they need to have impeccable knowledge of the topography, of the terrain. They need to know all the terrain benchmarks to navigate through it. And this becomes especially important while flying long ranges. "We See Russians. Work, Brothers!" — The Combat Routine of FPV Drone OperatorsIf you enjoy watching Russian infantry and equipment get blown to pieces, don't forget the hard work behind the scenes of FPV drone strike new video on our YouTube channel takes you… — First Corps Azov of the National Guard of Ukraine (@azov_media) April 21, 2025 Q: Late last year, you began to use the new SETH drone, which features a delta wing planform similar to the Russian Shahed drones. What can you tell me about this new drone? A: They are, from time to time, called Lancet analogs. From time to time, they are called mini Shaheds. Well, I do not know why we tend to use those analogies with the Russian systems. I think that's not really appropriate, but I must say that, in collaboration with the reconnaissance UAVs, these drones make quite a strong complex and operating together, they can ensure up to 100% probability of engaging high-value targets. But of course, that's just what is said on paper. In practice, we have already had cases of actual combat deployment of those systems, but I'm not really ready to comment on their success at this moment. However, I would just like to say that since these systems are quite expensive – one system costs approximately several hundred thousand dollars – we need to find high-value targets for such systems. So for example, this can be the enemy's air defense assets. And I think that one of the interesting specificities for deployment of these unmanned systems is that the reconnaissance drone that is used in tandem with this drone, it is also used as the repeater for the strike component of the system. In general, this drone has huge potential, but still, the technology is quite raw. It still has to be refined. Q: Talk about how the SETH drone works. A: This drone doesn't really detect the target…all the commands are still given by the pilot, so the pilot commands when the drone should center on the target and fly towards it, and it doesn't have any auto-detection or auto-guidance systems…It is equipped with GPS CRPA [Controlled Reception Pattern Antenna] but that is used mainly for positioning the system, positioning the strike component, and not for guidance. As for the guidance system, it is equipped with a contrast target acquisition system so we see the picture, we indicate what exactly we need to capture as an acquired target, and after that, the guidance system comes into action. Q: What is the range of the SETH? A: Its range of operations is up to 40 kilometers (about 25 miles). Anything that is further than 40 kilometers is quite a questionable issue. So if, for example, you have a range of 50 kilometers (about 31 miles), it's not a fact that it can do such distances. It also definitely depends on weather conditions, which definitely define whether we are going to get the intended results. If the weather conditions are unsatisfactory, if they are poor, then even flying 40 kilometers can be quite a problem. But the official specifications indicate that its range of operations is from 40 to 50 kilometers. Q: What kind of warhead does it have? A: It is equipped with a high explosive and a fragmentary warhead. Some people call it a thermobaric warhead. The payload is three kilograms (about 6.6 pounds). And I must say that this is not a lot for such a weapon. And if, for example, we try to strike heavily armored enemy vehicles, it is questionable whether this strike is going to be successful, which is why we actually hunt those targets that I have already mentioned before. New Ukrainian UAS SETH with AI of the 12th Azov Brigade — 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝕯𝔢𝔞𝔡 𝕯𝔦𝔰𝔱𝔯𝔦𝔠𝔱△ (@TheDeadDistrict) March 10, 2025 Q: Do you use so-called mothership drones as signal repeaters to extend the range of your FPV drones? A: In terms of those mother drones that you were referring to, the technology still needs further refining, and at the moment, it is quite expensive. The highest price offer that I heard for one is approximately $200,000 and it is quite unacceptable for us to pay so much for one asset, for one function, a stable functioning operational asset. As for the repeaters, there is a misconception that they are only used to increase range. We mostly use them at the beginning to cover areas that were not covered by our radio signals, those areas that were behind the radio horizon or that were in the radio shadows. Only with the evolution of these tactics, of these technologies, with the use of more powerful carriers that could bear a huge payload and that could lift up more. We could also use higher quality parts, and with these high-quality parts, with better repeaters, we could also cover longer distances. But again, the repeaters are also not a magic pill. So there are still some challenges in using them. As for the mother drone technology, we are currently experimenting with this technology ourselves, because we understand that for us, it is going to be cheaper to invent something ourselves than to pay for unknown assets, unknown products and unknown technologies that still need to be tested. Ukrainian "Dovbush" UAV carrying and releasing two FPV drones during "Dovbush" UAV is reportedly capable of carrying up to six FPV drones at the same — Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (BlueSky too) (@Archer83Able) November 19, 2024 Q: Do you use thermite-dropping so-called dragon drones? A: We do deploy such drones depending on the season. But I would like to mention that there is nothing very special about such drones, and their efficiency is also questionable. From time to time, you can use five drones like this within a 100-meter (about 328-foot) sector of the front line, and there will be no effect at all. But if something catches fire, then, of course, even one drone like that can be effective. But in general, if you ask me, I would like to say that they mostly have a psychological effect. Q: Why are they not effective from a combat standpoint? A: This combat inefficiency is caused by the fact that the majority of the incendiaries that are dropped burn out before even reaching the surface that they target. So if we talk about, let's say, a 2.5 kilogram (about 55 pounds) payload, then only approximately 50% of the incendiary that is dropped actually reaches the Earth and reaches the target. Ukrainian thermite dropping drones continue to rapidly proliferate through various drone units. Seen here, a Ukrainian drone from the 60th Mechanized Brigade drops a stream of molten thermite on a Russian-held treeline. — OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) September 4, 2024 Q: What percentage of Russian targets in your sector are destroyed by drones as opposed to artillery, indirect fire, aerial munitions or other means? A: I would like to say that, according to my conservative estimation, well, once again, we use drones more than the Russians because there is a deficit of other kinds of fires. And drones are actually the cheapest way to strike the enemy, the cheapest kind of fires that we have. And that's also quite efficient, because, for example, if we fire one artillery shell that costs $3,000 that's that's quite a lot. But we have switched to drones, and I can say about my unit that we ensured approximately 80% of all targets engaged, from our brigade, are by unmanned systems. I think that this percentage is a bit lower, but still, most of the targets struck by our fires are struck by drones. Q: What about uncrewed ground vehicles (UGVs)? How prevalent are they in your operations? A: We use land-based systems for supply purposes, and especially for supplying medicine, including blood. We also used air drones for that as well. But in terms of land-based systems, we mostly use them for logistical purposes. The system is still under development. The technology is still quite raw, and the level of stability is not very high. We have been deploying such systems since the autumn of 2024, and now they're more or less stable. They are quite functional and operational, but still, there are many peculiarities that still need further refinement. For example, there are problems with the radio connection. The radio connection is now the only possible stable way to connect with the drone. No other stable connection solution has been offered as of now. As a maximum, we can use the land-based robotic systems to evacuate the bodies of our fallen brothers in arms. We have also tried to deploy them as kamikaze drones, but they didn't show a very high level of efficiency. They usually do not reach the target. There are some problems with the radio connection, and the only way to connect to them is by using repeaters. Usually, we mount [the repeaters] on the Mavic drones. And we also do not have a first-person view video from the land-based system, so we can only observe and control the land-based systems by observing them from the Mavic drone, from the repeater drone, and the need to continually charge the repeater drone and fly back and forth slows down the operation. And because of that, the operation can last from two hours to the whole night, for example. Q: Do you use ground drones with machine guns or other kinetic systems? A: We do not use such systems with mounted fires on them, because this is actually the area where I am afraid of the friendly fire… These systems can have unexpected behavior, and this is why they are still waiting for further refinement of the technology. But we cannot rely on systems collected from Chinese parts to provide us with reliable combat solutions. So until the state introduces some kind of standards, some kind of mandatory requirements for such systems, we cannot talk about steady combat solutions. And I think that even then, we won't have an ultimate guarantee that such systems won't harm our units, our troops. Q: Do you envision a future where combat will be between drones and humans will just be hiding out, operating them? A: We are actually moving towards that. We gradually move towards that, and not because we want that, but mostly because we are short on human resources. And we are moving towards the situation where we have, like, several unmanned systems that can be operated by one person who is in the shelter, that is safe. We are gradually moving towards the principle that the life of one soldier, one human, is considered to be of much higher value than any piece of equipment, no matter how high value it is. And maybe we are transitioning to those principles of unmanned system usage way too fast, and that is why we also suffer a lot of losses that maybe could be avoided. But maybe that's also for the better, because at the moment, we are making a lot of mistakes that our successors would be able to learn from. Q: What kind of mistakes? A: I think that we are currently in the state of the so-called technological rush, and we are trying to implement the unmanned systems as fast as possible, and we are deploying our unmanned systems units with the same level of intensity as our infantry units. And when people are tired, when they're exhausted, they can make mistakes, and from time to time, unfortunately, these mistakes can lead to lethal consequences. Fortunately that these cases are not very frequent, but still, they happen. Q: Are you talking about fratricide? A: If we see fratricide as the damage that is dealt to that very crew that operates this drone. From time to time, when some experimental systems are tested, then this may lead to the injury of the operators, and the problems may be related both to the drones themselves and also the explosives that are used. Contact the author: howard@
Business Insider
30-05-2025
- Business Insider
I'm a ballroom dancer who joined Ukraine's special forces. The war took my leg, but I have no regrets signing up.
This is as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Serhii Nazarenko, a 31-year-old Kyiv resident who taught ballroom dancing for 11 years before the war. He is now an officer and machine gunner of the NGU's elite Omega group. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity. I was wide awake when I lost my leg. We were in Luhansk, and my squad was ordered to assault a Russian position in the treelines. All I could see was the soil flying as I toppled over. Then I remember seeing my commander frozen, shock in his eyes, as I lay on the ground. Three seconds later, he started shouting. I'd stepped on a land mine. "Apply your tourniquet on your leg," he yelled. Emotionless, I dug my tourniquet out of my vest and tied it around my right leg. Or what was left of it. By the time we retreated and I was evacuated to the hospital, I knew that almost everything below my right knee was gone. We were incredibly lucky. Everyone else in my squad was safe and with no injuries, and we returned home that day. I've been part of the Ukrainian National Guard's Omega group since early 2024. As special forces, we're deployed to assist different brigades along the front lines, conducting rescue missions, reconnaissance, and raids. As a machine gunner, my job was to provide suppressive fire and sometimes lead portions of an assault with light machine guns such as the Soviet PKM or NATO-standard M240. That was until October, when I was sent back to Kyiv, my hometown, to recover from my leg injury. Before I fought the Russians, I danced I never thought I'd join the military. Before Russia invaded in 2022, I was a sales relations manager for a customer service company headquartered in Arizona. While working full-time, I also taught ballroom dancing — a craft I'd been pursuing since my mother took me for lessons when I was 12. For over 10 years, I performed onstage and trained students at a dance school in Kyiv. In 2021, I was also a choreographer for the Ukrainian version of "Dancing with the Stars." When Russia invaded my country in 2022, I joined Ukraine's National Guard. Our first mission was to defend Hostomel as Russian paratroopers tried to take the airfields, though I was at the rear because I was new. Then, we were assigned to attack the infamous Russian column of armored vehicles stuck on the road to Kyiv. After the Russians retreated, I was mostly sent to patrol areas that Ukraine had already retaken, keeping the peace in cities under our control. I felt like I could do more. I kept thinking that I hadn't done my job for my country yet, so I applied to Omega. The process to join took several weeks. I had to apply through a Google Form, participate in an interview, and take a physical test. Fighting in Ukraine's special forces Omega accepts members from many walks of life, but it is selective. The most important skill they looked for was my capacity to learn quickly. I had some combat experience, but I had to be proficient in various weapons beyond my standard-issue assault rifle, such as machine guns and grenade launchers. I spent about six weeks training with Omega and integrating into my unit. You can train for as long as you like, but the real combat situation is when you show your real ability to fight. Your best test is the front line. A key part of being an Omega member is being able to adapt. Each day, you're learning new information about your equipment, about weapons, about tactics, about strategy, about drones, about reconnaissance. My deployments with Omega were different from my time protecting cities in the rear. We rotated with other Omega soldiers on the front line, often fighting in close contact with the enemy, like clearing multistory apartment buildings, floor by floor, in Zaporizhzhia. War is nothing like in video games or Hollywood. It's messy. Out of all my missions, one left the deepest impact. We were sent to help the crew of an armored vehicle that came under Russian mortar fire. Even though we warned them to wait for us, they got out of their vehicle to repair it, and a mortar round struck them. One of them died, and we were forced to change our mission to focus on evacuating the wounded. We see every day how warfare is changing. Even though I'm in the special forces, not everything depends on your skill. When a drone comes to attack you, you hide. It doesn't matter who you are — the drone or mortar just hits you, and that's it. The biggest pressure in Omega is to be reliable for your teammates, so we all know we can depend on each other. When I stepped on the land mine and lost my leg, my first thought was: "I'm the bad person because I didn't do my job. Now we have to go back because of me." Returning to the war after losing a leg After October, I was given a prosthetic leg, and now I've been back at my unit for the last three weeks. So far, I'm helping out with public events and other tasks away from combat, while waiting for my sports prosthetic so that I can start training to run again and hopefully fight one day. When the war is over, we'll need to rebuild Ukraine's cultural scene. So many of our dancers and artists have died. Losing my leg will severely hurt my dancing ability, because although I have a prosthetic leg, I've lost my right foot. Still, if given a choice, I'd do it all again: Joining the National Guard in 2022 and then Omega in 2024. I know why I'm doing my job, for my family and homeland; I have a wife and a five-year-old daughter in Kyiv. For now, we can't think about dancing when our country's children are dying. But I want to return to the ballroom when the fighting is done. At least, I'll try. People will probably be able to tell that I'm wearing prosthetics, but I still want to perform. Hopefully, it will be a beautiful dance.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Inside Ukraine's Fiber-Optic Drone War
Across the battlefield, both Ukraine and Russia are using fiber optic cables instead of radio waves to connect many of their first-person view (FPV) drones with their controllers. That makes them impervious to jamming and other forms of electronic warfare and helps mitigate the effects of terrain that can also interfere with radio control. Now, the commander of the First Corps Azov Brigade of the Ukrainian National Guard's Unmanned Systems Battalion, who uses the call sign Yas, has given us the bottom-line on the current state of play when it comes to actually employing fiber optic FPVs as weapons in an exclusive interview. It's worth noting that the Russians started the use of fiber optic wires on the FPV drone in the Spring of 2024 and Ukraine quickly followed suit. You can read more about that in our original story here. Yas' comments on fiber optic FPVs are part of a nearly two-hour interview conducted on Memorial Day about the Unmanned Systems Battalion and its fight in and around the rubbled city of Toretsk in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region. We will publish the rest of the conversation in the coming days. The questions and answers have been slightly edited for clarity. Q: What is your experience using fiber optic cables on FPV drones? A: I'm very lucky, because I have my people, and one of the members of our team, he practically made the implementation of this technology in our unit possible, and the idea is great, because you are operating in total radio silence, so you cannot be detected by any radar system [passive sensors]. And any electronic warfare means that later on, they are just inefficient. At the same time, the use of fiber optic cables, as with any FPV drone, has its own peculiarities of operation, and if the pilot is not skilled enough, that is going to lead to significant losses in such equipment and systems. Ukrainian soldiers walk along a field covered in fiber-optic cable from FPV drones somewhere near the frontline. — Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (BlueSky too) (@Archer83Able) May 27, 2025 Q: What's the percentage of targets hit with fiber-optic controlled drones? A: I would say that there is approximately a 50% probability that a totally functional drone that flies on a combat mission will strike its target. And I would also like to mention that this technology is quite fragile. Any mistake in handling this drone can result in an unintended explosion, for example, or in a loss of control. So that's quite a surprising thing, but we also had such issues of control loss. Mistakes can result in the fiber optic tearing as well, but nevertheless, we also had some successful strikes with the fiber optic drones. Q: Any other drawbacks to fiber optic cables that you can share? A: When manufacturers are very hasty about selling their technology, selling their recently developed product to us, this is actually the segment of the systems that causes the most problems. Q: How so? A: Well, the problem was that at the start of the development of this technology, the majority of manufacturers did not produce the components for the drone themselves; they basically purchased the fiber optic systems from China, and they were just reselling the Chinese components. We were buying the technology without properly understanding how to deploy it. And there was also this issue with radio signals, so we needed to switch off the radio signal ourselves, because the manufacturers did not understand these specifics. And those manufacturers that just resold the components and drones from China proved to be inefficient in terms of their systems. But with time – not all of them, but at least some of them – listened to us, they paid attention to our feedback, and with time, they came to better products, which in turn can lead to a 50% probability of a successful strike, and even higher. A Russian FPV drone located a Ukrainian fiber-optic quadcopter, and then cut the fiber-optic cable with its rotor blades, causing the Ukrainian drone to crash. — Samuel Bendett (@sambendett) May 28, 2025 Q: What percentage of your drones use fiber optic cables? A: This number is the lowest, and if I were to state a percentage, I would say that this is less than 5%. Q: Why? This technology is widely used by Ukraine and Russia alike. A: The popularity of this technology is the key reason why we cannot ensure we have a sufficient number of drones using this technology. We understand that in terms of quality, any good manufacturer that provides their clients with high-quality products – and this is just a basic market principle – they will always have a lot of clients. And in Ukraine, there are several good manufacturers of fiber optics for such drones, and they have quite a long waiting list. And then we have a dilemma when waiting for two to three months is quite a long period of time, and purchasing low-quality systems is also not an option for us. Fiber-Optic FPV Drones Strike Enemy Targets We will find a countermeasure-resistant FPV drone to break through any Russian electronic warfare system. This is precisely the type of weapon deployed by Azov drone operators in the Toretsk video features strikes on… — First Corps Azov of the National Guard of Ukraine (@azov_media) March 24, 2025 Q: How much do fiber optic cable drones cost? A: Well, the price is now quite lower at the moment for drones with a range of up to 10 kilometers (about 6.2 miles). It is approximately $1,200. But again, the key problem with ensuring a sufficient number of these drones is their deficit in general. Q: What is the maximum range of your fiber-optic drones? A: It all depends on the fiber optic coil that is used. We have efficiently used drones with ranges up to 15 kilometers (about 9.3 miles). I know about successful deployments of 20-kilometer (about 12.4 miles) drones. But at the same time, we know that the enemy already uses drones with up to 30 kilometers (about 18.6 miles) range. Ukrainian drone manufacturer Alexey Babenko says that Ukrainian fiber optic FPVs are currently not as successful as Russian range spools in particular are only 30% successful at 15km compared to 80% for Russian flights up to 20km.1/ — Roy (@GrandpaRoy2) April 30, 2025 Q: How do you bridge that gap? A: It's quite difficult for me to say, because I'm a simple person, I mostly deal with the usage of the systems, and I think that the planning and the scaling of these technologies need to be undertaken at the state level. And I would very much like to say that everything is perfect in this regard. But unfortunately, it is not so there are the state at the moment doesn't ensure a steady supply of such systems, such drones. And that is why it is quite difficult for us to catch up with the enemy with regard to most systems. I wouldn't say with all of them, but at least with many systems, the enemy puts the processes at the state level. So we already have established processes at the state level, with simple drones, with radio control drones, etc, but in terms of the fiber optic drones, there is still much work to be done. Thread 1/xUAS Battalion of the 12th Special Purpose Brigade 'Azov' hits Russian Comm Equipment with FPV dronesSource: — Audax (@AudaxonX) May 14, 2025 Q: What's the success rate of your radio-controlled drones? A: I think that we need to divide this particular issue into two parts. The first is actually reaching the targets. And as you have mentioned, for fiber optic drones, the probability of reaching the target is really 50% and higher. And for radio drones, due to various reasons, including the frequency overloading problem and various different factors, the probability can be much lower. For example, it can decrease to 30% etc. But there is also the story of actually striking the target. So not only reaching but striking targets. And here, other factors also come into play. For example, we can say that when the enemy is actively moving, when the enemy personnel is taking shelter, when they're hiding in basements and dugouts, etc, the probability of efficiently striking the target will be much lower than, for example, if we are deploying our drones in the open air. And the same story is true about deploying drones to strike enemy vehicles. So once again, there is a higher probability of reaching the target. So it's not a problem for a radio-controlled drone to reach a target. But there is, for example, an issue with the frequency overload, and we are trying to solve that through internal coordination, so we coordinate among the units in order not to overload one particular frequency. But there are also other aspects that also come into play. Q: Such as? A: If we delve deeper into the smaller details, we can say that these other factors include the enemy's tactics, the shooting down of our drones, and also definitely the electronic warfare measures that the enemy implements. The drones that are currently provided by the state are usually unable to operate at ranges more than five to eight kilometers (about 3.1 miles to about five miles) from the contact line. In terms of the enemy's electronic warfare (EW) measures, they have reached quite a high level of efficiency because they are frequently successful in suppressing, jamming our radio signal. We are trying to use better parts, more powerful parts, for our repeaters in order to provide coverage for our drones and to be able to continue efficiently deploying them. Unlimited Destruction of Occupiers in the Toretsk SectorAzov's FPV drones strike without limits — there is a munition for every video showcases a compilation of Russian light vehicles and personnel struck by the fighters of the Unmanned Systems Battalion of the… — First Corps Azov of the National Guard of Ukraine (@azov_media) March 15, 2025 Q: How strong is Russian electronic warfare? And how has it developed over the course of the war? A: Well, I think that the power of any element of the Soviet army is not in the equipment's quality, but in the equipment's quantity. So the Russian electronic warfare has an undoubted advantage in terms of numbers, and this is especially true for the electronic warfare. For example, they invent a countermeasure, they learn how to jam our control channel, and they quickly scale this decision, the solution, up. They quickly distribute that among their military. So then we change to another channel. We change to other frequencies, but when they find out how to channel those, they also scale this solution up. The same was true about our video transmission. So they learn how to create obstacles at the standard frequencies. Usually that's 5.8 [GHz] and they also learn how to introduce countermeasures to other systems of communication. I would like to say that at the moment, Russian electronic warfare is undoubtedly one of the leading in the world. So I do not want to underestimate the enemy. We need to accept, to acknowledge, the level of the enemy. Q: Can you tell me how else you're trying to improve your radio line of sight and beyond line of sight capabilities of your radio-controlled drones? A: I can differentiate it into two parts. The first is dealing with radio shadow. And usually, as for me, the best way to deal with this problem is to launch repeaters and place them directly above the targets to be struck. For example, we use this tactic when we need to deploy our drones inside of buildings. When we send our drones towards a building, we actually land the repeater on top of the building, and then we deploy another drone. The picture was just perfect. The picture was very good because of that repeater placement. As for your question regarding the line of sight, I think that's not really an issue of the line of sight, but about the transmission intensity. More and more drones are deployed, and more and more systems are used, and we are we're dealing with the problem that some frequencies are overloaded. We need to deal with these issues, and we need to experiment with the emitters and receivers in order to solve this problem, because both us and the enemy, we all will use more and more drones. And as for some ideas that are currently discussed – like the use of aerostats to install repeaters on – personally, I do not like this idea. It's not really efficient. In the next installment of this interview, Yas talks about the unit's new SETH drone, the problem with thermite-spewing so-called dragon drones and why Azov doesn't use weapons-equipped ground drones. Contact the author: howard@
