Ukraine’s Super Tiny, Super Expensive Black Hornet Drone

The Black Hornet drone that western nations have supplied Ukraine with has some very interesting tech and capabilities, and is all but invisible to visual and electronic detection. But there’s a catch.

  • “In Ukraine’s battle for Air Supremacy with Russia, a swarm of tiny black hornet drones might just give it the edge.” I wouldn’t say air supremacy, I would say it’s extending Ukraine’s lead in recon supremacy.
  • “These drones act as eyes for Ukrainian troops on the ground. And thanks to the US, UK and Norway, Ukraine now has an entire fleet of them ready to be deployed at a moment’s notice.”
  • “In July 2023, the United States announced that it would deliver $400 million in security assistance to Ukraine. Beyond the typical armored vehicles and air defense missiles, that package would also include Black Hornet drones made by Teledyne FLIR defense. A month later the UK made a similar announcement. Working with Norwegian manufacturers it would spend $9 million on these microdrones, sending them over to Ukraine for use as covert surveillance tools.”
  • “All told, Ukraine now has over 1,000 of these drones at its disposal, and they’re helping Kiev slowly turn the tide against Putin’s invading forces.” Hopefully, but I think that remains to be seen at this point.
  • “In Ukraine’s case, they’ve received shipments of the Black Hornet 3, which measures just 6.6 inches from nose to tail, and weighs only 1.16 ounces. In other words they’re tiny. So tiny, in fact, that the,drones are easy to hide among foliage and trees, making them almost imperceptible to opposing troops.”
  • “Further more, the drones are designed to be practically silent when in operation.”
  • It’s a tiny helicopter outfitted with several high definition cameras, limited autonomy, a radio range of a bit over a mile, about 25 minutes of flight time (and takes about the same to recharge). It can actually penetrate into buildings and trenches.
  • I’m skipping over the idea the video floats of these things spying on Russian planes, since the size/speed/distance equation simply isn’t there.

    But all these high tech capabilities come at a price: “$195,000 per unit.” You can buy an awful lot of RPG drones for that kind of money…

    The drones are not brand-spanking new, and were used in Afghanistan. However, I’ve got to think the Russian’s insistence on extensive defensive fortification are going to make them ideal for the sort of atomized conflicts we’ve seen thus far in the war, and they should be great at spotting targets for artillery and weapons drones.

    I can see having one of these per infantry platoon. But the high per-unit costs precludes the idea they discuss of each member of the platoon having one, at least until that cost comes way, way down…

    Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

    22 Responses to “Ukraine’s Super Tiny, Super Expensive Black Hornet Drone”

    1. The Gaffer says:

      It seems the Russians retired their Badger J, and we our EA-6B, a bit early.

    2. Dave L. says:

      I worked an Army warfighter experiment/tech trial at Fort Bliss back in fall 2015. I’m not sure if it was those same drones, or maybe an earlier model. IIRC, the Stryker company that was testing them had one per vehicle, so 4 per platoon, or 1 per squad with the PL having one. The PSG said they could keep one in the air pretty much constantly, with two charging and one in reserve.

    3. 10x25mm says:

      The ZALA Lancet drone the Russians just used to light up an Ukrainian M1 Abrams near Berdychi costs only $ 32,600.

    4. foot in the forest says:

      You could make it out of Diamonds, Gold, and Platinum and it would be cheaper. It is designed to drain wallets and it is doing a fine job. Actual cost Under 500 bucks. A fucking joke, just like the rest of military procurement.

    5. jabrwok says:

      I’m reminded of a fictional video showing some terrorists releasing a swarm of such mini-drones, all equipped with small guns firing explosive ammo, which went on mass-killing missions at some university.

    6. Malthus says:

      “ The ZALA Lancet drone the Russians just used to light up an Ukrainian M1 Abrams near Berdychi costs only $ 32,600.”

      The $700,000 S-200 missile the Ukrainians just used to light up a $300,000,000 Beriev A-50 AWACS demonstrates that Russia’s top-tier aircraft are vulnerable to Soviet era SAMs. The loss this month of three Russian Su-34s and two Su-35s is additional evidence that Russia is losing control over Ukrainian air space. The Sukhoi slaughter and A-50 massacres will continue until moral improves.

    7. Kirk says:

      It’s an official program of the US military… As such, it is meant more to generate funds and post-military career jobs for high-ranking officers than it is to build affordable weapons for the defense of our nation.

      If such a program results in something worthwhile, it will always turn out to be waaaaaay more expensive and less capable than the competitors built by our allies: Witness the Israeli Spike program, in all of its variations, and the South Korean MLRS system of systems…

      Anyone familiar with the US military procurement system can tell you these things. It’s all about the contracts. Every single one of these big-ticket items has wound up gold-plated and too expensive to really buy in large numbers.

      Of course, you could likely make the case that the allies are strap-hanging, letting the US make the investments and the mistakes, but… Yeah. I look at things like NGSW and despair; they’re not really addressing the real problems on the battlefield.

    8. Malthus says:

      “ Anyone familiar with the US military procurement system can tell you these things.”

      I may be old but I can still remember when Pentagon procurement reform was proposed during Reagan’s first term of office. We are still discussing it four decades later.

      The problem is that the proposed Mk-1 version of a weapon gets a recommended upgrade-Mk-1a-before the production schedule can even begin. Then, even more “improvements” are required to meet ever unfolding battlefield contingencies. Before long, the Mk-1 is modified beyond recognition and no longer serves for the purpose it was originally designed to meet. In effect, it is obsolete before its production run is finished.

      If Pentagon war planners do not have the foresight and intelligence to clearly articulate their hardware requirements, the job needs to be farmed out to private enterprise, who can better design and produce weaponry at a cost savings than the military seems able to do.

    9. Kirk says:

      A lot of the problem is that the military is stove-piped beyond all recognition, and in ways that would blow the average civilian’s mind, if they knew and understood the implications.

      Once upon a time, in an Army long ago, we had this neat little tool that the Army Research Laboratories turned out, called the Army Combat Leader’s Guide.

      This guide was a highly useful leader’s tool, filled with all sorts of valuable information and templates for the junior leader. It was cross-branch; had stuff from Infantry, Engineer, Artillery… Everybody.

      Now, here’s what’s darkly humorous about the dysfunction within the Army: Everyone and their brother that saw this thing thought it was the Greatest Thing Ever for the junior leader. Everyone thought that it ought to be made a part of the Army’s system.

      Nobody wanted to pay for it. Or, take responsibility for it. The CLG made its way through half-a-dozen iterations and attempts to get someone to make it a permanent part of doctrine, but… Nobody wanted it. Not our job, see?

      Eventually, Army Research Laboratories ran out of money to keep the program going, and it got dropped. Good-bye, valuable tool…

      You don’t want to know the number of like things that stove-piping has killed. Parochial? The Army? Perish the thought. And, if you ever get to the level of looking at Joint Operations between the services…? LOL…

      Swear to God, if you made me King for a Day over all of it? I’d be hard-pressed to keep from blowing the whole sorry mess up and starting over. Some of those “branch disputes” go back to before the Civil War…

      Anyone here ever hear of Braxton Bragg, the guy they named Fort Bragg after…?

      “There is a famous, apocryphal story, included in Ulysses S. Grant’s memoirs, about Bragg as a company commander at a frontier post where he also served as quartermaster. He submitted a requisition for supplies for his company, then, as quartermaster, declined to fill it. As company commander, he resubmitted the requisition, giving additional reasons for his requirements, but as the quartermaster, he denied the request again. Realizing that he was at a personal impasse, he referred the matter to the post commandant, who exclaimed, “My God, Mr. Bragg, you have quarreled with every officer in the army, and now you are reduced to quarreling with yourself!””

      The Bragg mentality is alive and well, within the US Army. Probably the other services, as well, but I lack the personal experience to comment on them, other than as an outside observer…

    10. Boobah says:

      Re: Bragg.

      Not sure I’ve seen such a pure example of Lawful Stupid demonstrated before.

    11. 10x25mm says:

      “The $700,000 S-200 missile the Ukrainians just used to light up a $300,000,000 Beriev A-50 AWACS demonstrates that Russia’s top-tier aircraft are vulnerable to Soviet era SAMs. The loss this month of three Russian Su-34s and two Su-35s is additional evidence that Russia is losing control over Ukrainian air space. The Sukhoi slaughter and A-50 massacres will continue until moral improves.”

      If any of this were true, you would have to wonder why the the Ukrainians have been repurposing their 5V28 missiles as ground attack ballistic missiles. They have been the main attack system used on wood products factories in Russia proper. In fact, their S200 systems were decommissioned in 2013 and they have only a few missiles left over. Have you tried to purchase vacuum tubes lately?

      The reason the Ukrainians falsely ascribed this shootdown (if it occurred) to the S200 is because the Russians blew apart another Patriot system on February 23rd. The Ukrainians are trying to divert public attention from this billion dollar loss. Whether or not the last Ukrainian Patriot system hit the Beriev A50 in that same combat action is yet to be determined.

    12. Lawrence Person says:

      Another Russian claim of knocking out a Patriot battery, another debunking.

    13. jeff says:

      Amazon sells DJI drones for $1,000 vs the $195,000 for the black hornets.

    14. 10x25mm says:

      “Another Russian claim of knocking out a Patriot battery, another debunking.”

      You have been scammed by Suchomimus.

      Patriot system components are shlepped on at least 13 different cargo vehicles made by the different nations which have purchased the PAC3 systems. The only photos we have of Patriot systems in Ukraine show the components on German MAN chassis, but presumably even those have been remounted on other chassis to frustrate Russian ISR. The least likely chassis for Ukraine to use would be the very distinctive U.S. HEMTTs, which would be the only HEMTT vehicles in Ukraine and stick out like a sore thumb to GRU’s Space Intelligence Division. The Patriots are probably their number one priority. Suchomimus really insults the intelligence of the American operators of these Patriot systems, particularly after the lessons learned last year.

      The roof of the Patriot command unit has undergone several distinct variations, with and without corrugations, depending upon the climate of residence. And it is easily covered with a tarp.

      Take a look at a decent topographic map of Ukraine and you will realize why the Ukrainians positioned this Patriot system just west of Kherson. Radar is a line of sight system. Russian pilots have been flying at extremely low altitudes to conduct their missions, precisely to avoid radar. So the Patriot radar has to be in the Ukrainian costal lowlands, south of their central plateau, if it is going to detect incoming Russian aircraft skimming the surface of the Black Sea. The Patriot battery won’t have adequate reaction time if it can only sight the Russian craft as they pop up to release their glide bombs.

      We will have a much better idea what happened on February 23rd after the Pentagon begins shipping additional weapons to Ukraine. Right now, all we know is that the VVS mounted a determined attack on a Patriot system in Ukraine on February 23rd.

    15. Lawrence Person says:

      ISW also mentions the A-50 shoot-down…but nothing about Russia snagging a Patriot.

    16. 10x25mm says:

      “ISW also mentions the A-50 shoot-down…but nothing about Russia snagging a Patriot.”

      This may well be, but Russian sources are surprisingly mute. Usually a “Milblogger” or several excoriates the Russian command after every significant loss. The only word of the Beriev A-50 AWACS shoot down comes from Ukrainian sources.

      The Russians were obviously hunting for the Patriot battery, if they lost any number of of the fighter-bombers that Ukraine claimed. The Russian tactical change up – skimming the Black Sea and Sea of Azov with a pop up to release glide bombs – two months ago was working very well, which presumably explains why the Patriot battery was moved to Kherson from either Odessa or points further north. If the Russians recently started to suffer losses of Su-34s and 35s at extremely low altitude, it makes no sense for them to provide a big, ripe target like a Beriev A-50 AWACS at an easily observable altitude. And it would focus their ISR for the Patriot battery on the coastal plain.

      Maybe the Russians offered up a drone with an RF transmitter to get the Patriot battery to expose itself? Given the intensive surveillance over the entire area by both sides, attention to camouflage of the Patriot system probably necessitated the Russians offering an extraordinary bait.

    17. Malthus says:

      “You have been scammed by Suchomimus.”

      You need not waste everyone’s time. Suchomimus already offered up the CGI angle as a facile explanation for the video of an A-50’s burning wreckage falling from the sky. Who we gonna believe—you or our lying eyes?

    18. Malthus says:

      “Have you tried to purchase vacuum tubes lately?”

      Tubed power amps are all the rage these days. They are retro-cool, like vinyl albums. I cannot readily afford old school technology like this but what causes you to imagine that Ukrainians are similarly constrained?

    19. Kirk says:

      “Have you tried to purchase vacuum tubes lately?”

      The last producers of these are within the old Soviet Union. Friend of a friend does old-school amplifier restoration and construction (very well-paid, I might add…) and he was lamenting in late 2022 how the supplies had dried up under the sanctions and the fact that the Russians were taking all the limited production…

      Not sure of the details, but I gather that at least some of the tubes he uses are also used in various ways in the old Soviet-era weapons systems that they’re trying to refurbish. One positive thing about the technology is that its much less prone to damage from EMP… Not anywhere near as rugged in terms of the physical abuse, but the odds are much higher it will still work after a nearby nuke strike. Something worth considering, when assessing the odds of Russian nukes being used.

    20. 10x25mm says:

      JJ Electronic in Čadca, Slovakia is the only remaining vacuum tube producer outside of Russia and China.

    21. 10x25mm says:

      Suchomimus is still scamming you.

      The U.S. M903 and German PAC3 MIM-104 shipping/launch cannisters are smooth, without anti crush ribs. This increases the packing factor in the shipping/storage containers used. Just like what is shown in the Russian video. The Germans have delivered two of the three Patriot systems Ukraine has received. Not certain whether the U.S. has delivered M903s.

      The TEL vehicle shown in the Russian video is too long to be the Tatra 813, by about 1.5 meters. Do a length estimation based on the 2.5 meter width of the Tatra 813. Most military cargo chassis are in the 2.4 meter – 2.5 meter width range, including the MAN and HEMTT. The Patriot missiles are a meter longer than the Vampire GRAD missiles and require a longer vehicle to accommodate the launch containers.

      The RM-70 does not mount shipping/launch cannisters, but rather 40 individual launch tubes which are distinctively separate with two transverse ribs. The 10 abreast tubes are easily distinguished in a dayligh image, but that distinction is not present here. The TEL in the Russian video has two abreast shipping/launch cannisters, which are typical of Patriot and ATACM, but the MGM-140 TEL is quite different from what is shown here.

    Leave a Reply