[Goose]

The FPV drone interceptor got the jet shahed from behind FWIW, it did not have favorable geometry.

The fact it was struck from behind does not mean it was a tail-chase all the way. Most FPVs would lose a tail-chase with a 230 mph Geran 3. The Geran 3 probably was approaching the drone launch point, although not necessarily at a fixed angle. That means the closure rate would be additive. Very low margin for error in the attack. The drone operator acquires the target. He then  gains altitude while he approaches the merge. As the  Shahed  passes, the drone dives down on it from behind, trading altitude for increased speed. The interceptor drone is now closing the target at a much lower speed than a head-on attack would produce, but still closing. Easier to aim with a reduced closure rate. Correct tactics for guns, but also for collision/proximity fuse.

I think it's very workable to have dispersed drone interceptors every 10 or 20 miles, especially with autonomous targeting. They already have that sort of system with 50 cals. I guess I don't see it as impossible,

That many drones and operators would be an immense logistics problem. Maybe it would be possible, but it seems unlikely to me. Do these systems all have their own radar? AFAIK most of the 50 cals are strictly visually operated. That would require a LOT of air search radars, and I don't think Ukraine has anywhere near that many. The October article did indicate that was a problem.

  especially with the fast pace of drone development in Ukraine, and the clear effectiveness we can see on these videos.

Sorry, but these videos are a N of 1. The fact something happened once doesn't necessarily mean it happens frequently and easily. If Ukraine was stopping virtually all of the "low end" drones then we would have a data point indicating effectiveness. So far, as I understand it these low-end drones are doing lots of damage to the power grid in Ukraine.

I agree an AWACS coordinated system would be even better. Ukraine has some capability in this regard with their Swedish donated Saab 340(s). They have at least one operating of two that were pledged. Unknown if the second one has been delivered yet.

It was apparently used to help a F16 kill a Russian Su-35 over Kursk in June.

https://defensemirror.com/news/39631

https://www.twz.com/air/claims-swirl-aro...-shootdown

I think you will appreciate this. Reportedly last night Ukrainian F16's shot down 34 of 35 Russian cruise missiles.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/12/23/8013110/

How Ukraine is using their AWACS capability routinely, I am unsure. They have not been mentioned frequently in the news apart from that Su35 shootdown. I suppose it's possible they are already well integrated in their air defense system, but with only 1 or 2 of them I'm certain they are not used continuously.

Unfortunately you are undoubtedly correct. 1 or 2 AWACS can't cover even the northern borders of Ukraine continuously. Just not enough aircraft. As I understand it both of the promised planes are operational in Ukraine. I am guessing they are used more to target cruise missiles than low-end drones, mostly because the damage potential of the cruise missiles are greater and you need either aircraft or fast missiles to shoot them down.

[Goose]

The FPV drone interceptor got the jet shahed from behind FWIW, it did not have favorable geometry.

The fact it was struck from behind does not mean it was a tail-chase all the way. Most FPVs would lose a tail-chase with a 230 mph Geran 3. The Geran 3 probably was approaching the drone launch point, although not necessarily at a fixed angle. That means the closure rate would be additive. Very low margin for error in the attack. The drone operator acquires the target. He then  gains altitude while he approaches the merge. As the  Shahed  passes, the drone dives down on it from behind, trading altitude for increased speed. The interceptor drone is now closing the target at a much lower speed than a head-on attack would produce, but still closing. Easier to aim with a reduced closure rate. Correct tactics for guns, but also for collision/proximity fuse.

I think it's very workable to have dispersed drone interceptors every 10 or 20 miles, especially with autonomous targeting. They already have that sort of system with 50 cals. I guess I don't see it as impossible,

That many drones and operators would be an immense logistics problem. Maybe it would be possible, but it seems unlikely to me. Do these systems all have their own radar? AFAIK most of the 50 cals are strictly visually operated. That would require a LOT of air search radars, and I don't think Ukraine has anywhere near that many. The October article did indicate that was a problem.

  especially with the fast pace of drone development in Ukraine, and the clear effectiveness we can see on these videos.

Sorry, but these videos are a N of 1. The fact something happened once doesn't necessarily mean it happens frequently and easily. If Ukraine was stopping virtually all of the "low end" drones then we would have a data point indicating effectiveness. So far, as I understand it these low-end drones are doing lots of damage to the power grid in Ukraine.

I agree an AWACS coordinated system would be even better. Ukraine has some capability in this regard with their Swedish donated Saab 340(s). They have at least one operating of two that were pledged. Unknown if the second one has been delivered yet.

It was apparently used to help a F16 kill a Russian Su-35 over Kursk in June.

https://defensemirror.com/news/39631

https://www.twz.com/air/claims-swirl-aro...-shootdown

I think you will appreciate this. Reportedly last night Ukrainian F16's shot down 34 of 35 Russian cruise missiles.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/12/23/8013110/

How Ukraine is using their AWACS capability routinely, I am unsure. They have not been mentioned frequently in the news apart from that Su35 shootdown. I suppose it's possible they are already well integrated in their air defense system, but with only 1 or 2 of them I'm certain they are not used continuously.

Unfortunately you are undoubtedly correct. 1 or 2 AWACS can't cover even the northern borders of Ukraine continuously. Just not enough aircraft. As I understand it both of the promised planes are operational in Ukraine. I am guessing they are used more to target cruise missiles than low-end drones, mostly because the damage potential of the cruise missiles are greater and you need either aircraft or fast missiles to shoot them down.