The APKWS is now capable of shooting down drones

Here's an interesting new video about Ukraine's use of the APKWS with the L3 Harris VAMPIRE system:


Hey friends, Wes O’Donnell here—Army and Air Force veteran, recovering journalist, and unapologetic fan of battlefield ingenuity.
Click to expand...
Today, we’re looking at new video of Ukraine’s Vampire Surface-to-Air Missile system—a joint marvel of American, Australian, and British engineering. This cost-effective, mobile system is obliterating Russian attack drones and reshaping the drone defense game.
Click to expand...
The VAMPIRE SAM (Vehicle-Agnostic Modular Palletized ISR Rocket Equipment) combines U.S.-made laser-guided APKWS rockets, Australian EOS gimbals for pinpoint targeting, and the ingenuity of mounting it all on flatbed trucks. I break down how this “Drone Slayer 9000” operates, from intercepting Russian drones with precision-guided strikes to the importance of mobility in modern warfare.
Click to expand...
You’ll learn:
How APKWS rockets evolved from unguided Hydra 70 munitions into deadly precision weapons.
Why the Australian EOS AS-65 gimbal is a game-changer for accuracy and stabilization.
How Ukraine is integrating the VAMPIRE alongside other tech, like Bushmasters and the Slinger system, to create an unstoppable counter-drone strategy.
Click to expand...
I’ll also dive into the Vampire drone, its unique electronic warfare resilience, and its role as a tank-destroying nightmare for Russian forces. Plus, a shoutout to Australia’s contributions—because the EOS tech and donated Bushmasters are saving lives on the frontlines.
Click to expand...
As drones and counter-drone tech evolve rapidly on Ukraine’s battlefield, the VAMPIRE highlights a new era in military defense: adaptable, affordable, and precise. But Ukraine needs more—more Vampires, more Slingers, and more support from allies to outpace Russian aggression.
Click to expand...
If you love geeking out about military tech as much as I do, make sure to hit that like button and subscribe—it really helps the channel grow.
Click to expand...
Advance Australia, and as always, glory to Ukraine, glory to the heroes. Slava Ukraini!
Click to expand...
#Ukraine #VampireSAM #DroneDefense #MilitaryTech #Australia #APKWS #RussiaUkraineWar #EOSGimbals #GloryToUkraine #SlavaUkraini #ukrainewar #славаукраїні #militarytechnology #l3harris #military
Click to expand...
 
sferrin said:
I've always thought if you took an F-89, made it low-wing with engines and intakes above the wing, a small AESA and IRST in the nose, and then stuff the tanks with APKWS and laser guided Zuni (if we still had Zuni). . . (Not literally an F-89 but I love the layout and giant wing.)
Click to expand...
IIRC there are still Zunis in inventory, the USN and USMC use them for airborne FACs to mark targets.

But they're a very low-production item since few get used per mission.
 
Ironic that light, affordable, numerous wvr guided rocket emerges as a go-to weapon - be it for CAS or for air-to-air work.

Which is totally against the general direction of combat aircraft development for last several decades.
 
NMaude said:
The Ukrainians will be paying close attention to this as the APKWS II missiles would be perfect for dealing with Shaheed drones.
Click to expand...

They have already been using the ground launched version for a year or two. They have even fitted it to a boat.
 
Ainen said:
Ironic that light, affordable, numerous wvr guided rocket emerges as a go-to weapon - be it for CAS or for air-to-air work.

Which is totally against the general direction of combat aircraft development for last several decades.
Click to expand...
Then again, Sidewinder started out as a bolt-on guidance kit for Zuni rockets, and has stayed in production since the 1950s.

I expect APKWS to be similarly long-lived.
 
APKWS used in conjunction with AH-64E Fire Control Radar tied to the TADS has likely already tested as the U.S. Army looks for ways to deal with the UAS/Lethal Drone issue over ground forces. Would not be surprised to find out the IAF has already "field tested" this.
 
Would work better with the ah-1Z Viper (it can dive faster to catch a batch of drone from an elevated position and fire repeatedly at them).

The Apache would have a smaller lethal zone being essentially static.
 
TomcatViP said:
Would work better with the ah-1Z Viper (it can dive faster to catch a batch of drone from an elevated position and fire repeatedly at them).

The Apache would have a smaller lethal zone being essentially static.
Click to expand...
Actually, the AH-64E is flown at speed most times now, around 120 knots. At least the U.S. Army is currently not flying at altitudes that allow for diving. I will agree that the Cobra is slightly faster, but the USMC has tested but not yet to integrate a radar system that would que the crew, so it would be purely visual ID engagements.
 
I'm still curious if the APKWS seeker has been used with the flechette warheads, using the flechettes as a lethality enhancer versus potentially-maneuvering targets...
 
Overall, the question really is whether now present low altitude battlefield (part of wider low altitude economy) stipulates a low altitude optimized fighter(like AFTI) to deal with it.

Modern fighters are moving further away from being a low altitude solution.

Helicopters are a part, but they're slow and frankly vulnerable.

Drone fighters are just not mature for the job.
 
Ainen said:
Overall, the question really is whether now present low altitude battlefield (part of wider low altitude economy) stipulates a low altitude optimized fighter(like AFTI) to deal with it.

Modern fighters are moving further away from being a low altitude solution.

Helicopters are a part, but they're slow and frankly vulnerable.

Drone fighters are just not mature for the job.
Click to expand...
I'm expecting helicopters to be replaced with tiltrotors in general, and attack helicopters to be part of a CCA network with a whole mix of different CCAs.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'm expecting helicopters to be replaced with tiltrotors in general, and attack helicopters to be part of a CCA network with a whole mix of different CCAs.
Click to expand...
True.

But recently, while trying accessing the sheer scale of the drone ecosystem(which probably includes converging increasingly smart cruise missiles and low altitude manned aircraft), I am increasingly of opinion that an actual fighter subtype may be needed.

It appears to me a bit hard to make VTOL types cover whole threat envelope.

Which is really from few cm... to full plane size, from ground to any plane altitude, from zero to any reasonable plane speed.
The only salvation here really is that higher options can be dealt with normally...but you still need to chase them down.
 
I think long term the answer will be A2A drones and short term it is 4G fighters carrying cost effective weapons (hydra, old model AAMs, etc). A dedicated low end fighter requires a whole new program and all of the upkeep of a manned aircraft. A CCA built or modified for the mission can sit in a hangar until the war kicks off.

What is probably much more difficult is detection and management of a masses UAV attack - the defense has to solve the traveling salesman problem of engaging the most targets with whatever resources are on hand. In comparison the operation of a CCA against individual targets is quite simple.
 
Drones are just...future.

Like, near future drone level, realistically, is Kizilelma (still a few years away) or S-70(with occasional blue screen of death). Neither is fully operational even in simple high altitude strike form.
I don't know when it'll transform into ability to perform fluent, independent work in a complex low altitude environment; i am not optimistic. Airborne lasers were seen as a solution, but something went wrong.

Note that problem is that there is no solution, but the problem is burning as hot as sun.
Drones determine ground warfare(and are at least relevant for naval one; Ukrainian fpv carriers should be a wake up call, if you somehow missed Iranian natural intelligence-powered swarm drones); i'd say, if your CAS can't deal with drones, it is as good as no CAS. Drones allow for alternative dimension of subscale aviation(growing into full-scale as needed), from battlefield interdiction to strategic bombing. They do so even now, in a makeshift form, produced by rather primitive "shadow factories".
Yet they deliver where traditional airpower stumbled. What they can do when produced by a country like China?
Elon Musk may have failed to deliver his point, but the problem is he most clearly has a point.

So, aircraft. There are many problems with 4th gen.
First, they are mostly not that maneuverable down low, and targets are often very low speed even for things like hornets and canard flankers. They're too fast as well.
We often perceive(or, to be exact, their producers try to present it this way) pre-stealth aircraft as birds not hampered by stealth. Realistically they're birds predating proper FBW research.
What is needed is agility and precise control from ~40kn(!) onwards (almost VTOL!), yet on a jet capable of supersonic speeds even on the deck; very high T:W is also needed. Maybe Su-57 can approach what's needed, but this is just the beginning...and frankly i'd rather ask for a much smaller, numerous, and even more agile plane(especially at lowest speeds).

Second, 4th gens aren't really safe down low at night/adverse weather, as their situational awareness there isn't enough. Like, if not for the lack of apkws, I'd rather call a F-35.
DAS is absolute must for this task, for safety reasons if anything else. As is something similar to Harrier II cockpit, with best possible visibility for the pilot(with state of art HMD, of course).

Finally, offensive sensors seem wrong.
No fighter can engage something as mundane as DJI Matrice (not even mentioning mavics), and those are key battlefield enablers nowadays.
The task calls not just for a proper free swinging 360 deg optical ball(F-35 IRST counts as one), but also for a dual-band X + Ku/Ka band radar set. This is more reminiscent of helicopters rather than of fighters.

IMHO, reality calls for a manned fighter, opotimised for low level work(but otherwise fully capable outside of low altitude/low speed), and the need is rather urgent.
It's twice as urgent when you see in which direction manned aviation develops; do you see J-36 clearing agricultural drones-turned-fpv motherships? Me neither.
But if you can't stop such a basic threat, do you really have air superiority?

APKWS is a starting point(Vikhr-1 and Martlet may work as viable alternatives); Attack helicopters and available fighters are useful immediate proxies.
I don't think 10-20 years into the future the drones will be there, and i do think that neither helicopters nor 4th gen fighters will cover the threat envelope.
 
Last edited:
I still do not think anyone is deploying a manned aircraft unit for the explicit purpose of shooting down UAVs/cruise missiles. I suspect ground based defenses will have to do this work until cost effective C-UAV drones are perfected. I doubt that is more than a decade away, and any aircraft development, purchase, and deployment in significant numbers is also a decade away.
 
I think we must be careful not to put all of our intellectual eggs into the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. While it does demonstrate the absolute Darwinian nature of modern existentialist war, a war in other parts of the world, or an even larger conflict in Europe, will most likely look different. Drones and unmanned assets will certainly play a part but the effects of electronic warfare and kinetics on them could call into question their being the premeir tool of tactical and operational warfare. Electonic brains are as suseptiable to electronic bullets as are human brains to lead bullets. Lobbing kinetics around over friendly troops might be less than optimal. High power electronic warfare capabilities, like that found on EA-18F might be more pragmatic.

While speed is certainly a key point to interception, blasting around at very low altitude in the most densly populated airspaces (artillery , mortar, bullets, other projectiles, friendly and enemy UAV, rotorcraft, antenna, powerlines) will be very hazardous. Let's not forget poor weather and birds as well.

For me a combined arms approach of multiple means from high speed interceptor drones to sticks will be the best solution.
 
Josh_TN said:
They have already been using the ground launched version for a year or two. They have even fitted it to a boat.
Click to expand...

I meant the air-launched version.

A thought occurred to me and that's what would be the US DoD tri-services designation for the APKWS missile be?
 
NMaude said:
I meant the air-launched version.

A thought occurred to me and that's what would be the US DoD tri-services designation for the APKWS missile be?
Click to expand...

I cannot imagine they have the equipment for it, or that if their F-16s could that they would use them that way. We have not seen F-16s with targeting pods, and I assume they would spend most of their time launching offensive weapons once they are up and running.
 
Josh_TN said:
I cannot imagine they have the equipment for it, or that if their F-16s could that they would use them that way. We have not seen F-16s with targeting pods,
Click to expand...

Are the Ukrainians going to be getting any of the Dutch AF F-16s? Because if they are they should be able to take APKWS laser-designator pod as the RDAF regularly upgraded their F-16s to match the the capabilities of the USAF F-16s.
 
NMaude said:
Are the Ukrainians going to be getting any of the Dutch AF F-16s? Because if they are they should be able to take APKWS laser-designator pod as the RDAF regularly upgraded their F-16s to match the the capabilities of the USAF F-16s.
Click to expand...

Assuming anyone donated the pods and that the pilots are trained to use them, and that the ZSU thought that was somehow a good use of their most capable air assets.
 
Well, right now they're flying somewhat questionable rear area LACM intercepts with just 4 missiles.
If anything, APKWS can do the exact same thing for a fraction of the price.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'm still curious if the APKWS seeker has been used with the flechette warheads, using the flechettes as a lethality enhancer versus potentially-maneuvering targets...
Click to expand...
They have tested it with M149 flechetee warhead
www.naval-technology.com

BAE’s APKWS rocket validates strike capabilities against maritime targets

BAE Systems' advanced precision kill weapon system (APKWS) has successfully completed its first over-water testing to demonstrate its anti-ship capabilities against multiple maritime targets.
www.naval-technology.com www.naval-technology.com
 
Ainen said:
If anything, APKWS can do the exact same thing for a fraction of the price.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Using old stock of AIM-120A/B and AIM-9L/M that would otherwise have to be destroyed, which is not free, vs. new APKWS...
 
As far as I see, US donations don't seem to be a dependable path anymore.

Also, any AMRAAM ultimately is a part of the whole stock, which (when used why way or another) requires replacement.
 
armyrecognition.com

US Army lab successfully performs first flight test of MMT-70 modular

US Army lab successfully performs first flight test of MMT-70 modular missile The U.S. Army Aviation & Missile Research,
armyrecognition.com armyrecognition.com


www.army.mil

AMRDEC successfully flight tests autopilot on open architecture missile

The U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center successfully flight tested the Modular Missile Technologies guided forward firing Control Test Vehicle number 1 on Nov. 8.
www.army.mil www.army.mil

return to widest capability Government lead program until variants can be sourced out to multiple vendors including S Korea to keep down cost as many missiles are required.

oldie but still relevant
1738883593069.png
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom