[Goose]

This article describes to some extent a new Ukrainian drone that is faster and carries a much bigger payload with a range of several hundred miles.  Basically a cruise missile, using a small, cheap turbofan jet engine.  I have seen other articles that say it has a payload of nearly 1 ton of explosives.
Will be interesting to see if they really did put something like this together.

https://simpleflying.com/ukraine-buildin...d%20drones.

Ukraine definitely has the technical ability to put something like this together. As the article points out they can manufacture jet engines, which most countries cannot. There is always the question of how many they can build, and that we don't know. The guidance system (both design and construction) for such a weapon is also a challenge. These days having a combination GPS-INS is the "bottom tier". IR target recognition is becoming de regueur.  Like any new weapons system it will undoubtedly have its teething problems.

The fact that Russia  evacuates flyable aircraft from targeted airfields is mind-boggling. I get it that an SU-34 is not an "air-to-air" weapon and is not something that one would choose to hunt drones. However, if you have time to evacuate the target you also have time to put up an air-to-air response. Just crazy Russia doesn't.

One immense disadvantage of relying on point-defense missile systems as your primary anti-drone defense is that it is inherently very short range. This is a product of the drone flight profile. The missile radars can't see the drones at all until they are quite close. You need lots and lots of the point defense systems because there are lots of valuable targets. How many such systems can/has Russia built and supplied trained crews for? Nowhere near enough. These missile systems are also a "last line of defense". If these point defense systems miss/are overwhelmed the drone hits the target. Aircraft OTOH have the look-down shoot down capability. Their radars can see the drones along the entire drone flight path. If they miss the first time they can quickly re-attack. Aircraft can also rapidly re-deploy from relatively far away. Aircraft can concentrate to defend the target being attacked. They don't have to be everywhere all the time.

Why isn't Russia doing this??? There must be a reason. It is the "textbook" response. There is an interesting link in the cited article. https://simpleflying.com/russia-arms-pro...an-drones/ OK, that kind of makes sense. You don't need a multi-million dollar fighter to shoot down a propeller driven drone flying at about 100 mph. However, why in any rational universe would Russia not use the fighters they already have to protect their assets?

---

Could such a drone improve the chance of taking out the Kerch Bridge?

Maybe. The quoted range is just on the edge of making it from Kherson to the bridge. The quoted range is undoubtedly an estimate/guess. The actual range may be longer. There is also the option of fitting a smaller warhead. Actually hitting the bridge is tricky unless the missile is equipped with some kind of target recognition system. GPS won't quite do it. A CEP of 10 meters (Tomahawk CEP) probably won't do it. Damage the bridge yes, destroy it no. If you fire "several" missiles the odds of an almost direct hit go way up. An IR or W band seeker makes for "one missile, no bridge". The bridge is also very well protected against drone attacks. There are lots of point defense systems scattered all over the approaches, at least on the Ukraine side. A single missile of this class probably wouldn't make it through. A "swarm" of such missiles accompanied by radar jammers/dummy targets certainly can.

As Ukraine has stated, they will destroy the bridge "when the time is right". IMO they are doing more good blowing up Russian air bases and arsenals than getting rid of the bridge would do ATM. If Ukraine generates a ground attack against Crimea, that could change,

Speaking of that bridge, Russia is building something alongside it
https://www.newsweek.com/mystery-structu...on-1942475

Could be some kind of decoy to confuse drone targeting. I am guessing it is a platform on which to mount very short range missile defenses and/or defenses against Ukrainian USVs.

[Goose]

This article describes to some extent a new Ukrainian drone that is faster and carries a much bigger payload with a range of several hundred miles.  Basically a cruise missile, using a small, cheap turbofan jet engine.  I have seen other articles that say it has a payload of nearly 1 ton of explosives.
Will be interesting to see if they really did put something like this together.

https://simpleflying.com/ukraine-buildin...d%20drones.

Ukraine definitely has the technical ability to put something like this together. As the article points out they can manufacture jet engines, which most countries cannot. There is always the question of how many they can build, and that we don't know. The guidance system (both design and construction) for such a weapon is also a challenge. These days having a combination GPS-INS is the "bottom tier". IR target recognition is becoming de regueur.  Like any new weapons system it will undoubtedly have its teething problems.

The fact that Russia  evacuates flyable aircraft from targeted airfields is mind-boggling. I get it that an SU-34 is not an "air-to-air" weapon and is not something that one would choose to hunt drones. However, if you have time to evacuate the target you also have time to put up an air-to-air response. Just crazy Russia doesn't.

One immense disadvantage of relying on point-defense missile systems as your primary anti-drone defense is that it is inherently very short range. This is a product of the drone flight profile. The missile radars can't see the drones at all until they are quite close. You need lots and lots of the point defense systems because there are lots of valuable targets. How many such systems can/has Russia built and supplied trained crews for? Nowhere near enough. These missile systems are also a "last line of defense". If these point defense systems miss/are overwhelmed the drone hits the target. Aircraft OTOH have the look-down shoot down capability. Their radars can see the drones along the entire drone flight path. If they miss the first time they can quickly re-attack. Aircraft can also rapidly re-deploy from relatively far away. Aircraft can concentrate to defend the target being attacked. They don't have to be everywhere all the time.

Why isn't Russia doing this??? There must be a reason. It is the "textbook" response. There is an interesting link in the cited article. https://simpleflying.com/russia-arms-pro...an-drones/ OK, that kind of makes sense. You don't need a multi-million dollar fighter to shoot down a propeller driven drone flying at about 100 mph. However, why in any rational universe would Russia not use the fighters they already have to protect their assets?

---

Could such a drone improve the chance of taking out the Kerch Bridge?

Maybe. The quoted range is just on the edge of making it from Kherson to the bridge. The quoted range is undoubtedly an estimate/guess. The actual range may be longer. There is also the option of fitting a smaller warhead. Actually hitting the bridge is tricky unless the missile is equipped with some kind of target recognition system. GPS won't quite do it. A CEP of 10 meters (Tomahawk CEP) probably won't do it. Damage the bridge yes, destroy it no. If you fire "several" missiles the odds of an almost direct hit go way up. An IR or W band seeker makes for "one missile, no bridge". The bridge is also very well protected against drone attacks. There are lots of point defense systems scattered all over the approaches, at least on the Ukraine side. A single missile of this class probably wouldn't make it through. A "swarm" of such missiles accompanied by radar jammers/dummy targets certainly can.

As Ukraine has stated, they will destroy the bridge "when the time is right". IMO they are doing more good blowing up Russian air bases and arsenals than getting rid of the bridge would do ATM. If Ukraine generates a ground attack against Crimea, that could change,

Speaking of that bridge, Russia is building something alongside it
https://www.newsweek.com/mystery-structu...on-1942475

Could be some kind of decoy to confuse drone targeting. I am guessing it is a platform on which to mount very short range missile defenses and/or defenses against Ukrainian USVs.