Gun-Armed Drone in Ukraine

Drone warfare has evolved massively in Ukraine since the Russian invasion in February, moving from commercial drones spotting enemies and dropping grenades to First Person View (FPV) drones capable of taking out a tank. One branch of the possible evolution of drones which hasn’t seen a great deal of development or practical use is the mounting of small arms on them. 

On 4 September, Wild Hornets, a Ukrainian drone manufacturing initiative, shared footage of what they claim is the first use of their gun-armed drone in combat. The video was shared with the caption [machine translated]: “this time, the first combat deployment was carried out—targeting a position with Russian forces. This test indicated the direction in which this project should move forward.”

The grainy footage from an FPV drone’s camera shows the barrel of an AK-74, mounted tilted to the right, at the bottom center of the frame. It is seen firing several full-auto bursts towards the ground but it’s difficult to see at what exactly. The drone is believed to be operated by the Bulava (Mace) drone team, which is believed to be attached to the Ukrainian Presidential Brigade.

Wild Hornets note that the rifle is mounted on one of their largest FPV drones, a Queen Hornet. The Queen Hornet FPVs can reportedly carry up to 9.5kg (21lbs) of payload so an AK-74 with a loaded magazine (even a 40-round RPK-74 magazine) would be no issue. The drone also has to contend with the rifle’s recoil and from the video it appears that on firing the drone’s flight is only slowed momentarily. The Queen Hornet was unveiled in March 2024, and began to appear on the frontline in July and have been used not only to drop munitions but to also deliver smaller drones downrange – acting as a carrier, and also as signal repeaters to enable other drones to travel further from their operators.  

The gun-armed FPV was first seen in a video shared on 16 August. Wild Hornets shared a video showing a Queen Hornet returning to Ukrainian lines with an AK-74 hanging below it – Wild Hornets claim that the rifle was a Russian AK salvaged with a magnet. A montage then shows the salvaged rifle being mounted on a Queen Hornet, with its stock removed to save weight, and test fired. The rifle appears to be held onto the drone with zip ties and a small grey box encloses the trigger – likely containing a servo to pull the trigger.

There have been efforts to mount firearms on drones outside of Ukraine and there is also some earlier evidence of Ukrainian drone teams attempting to mount guns on the large Baba Yaga heavy drones earlier with imagery appearing in April of a large, possibly gun-armed, drone being filmed from above. In May, footage of what could also lay claim to the first use of a gun-armed drone in combat was shared. The footage was shared by the 74th Battalion of the 102nd Territorial Defense Brigade and shows a Baba Yaga drone equipped with a firearm, again firing bursts, the weapon appears to have a sighting post attached to allow the weapon to be aimed using the drone’s camera. The footage of the drone firing on Russian positions was reportedly filmed northwest of Marfopil, in Zaporizhzhia.

There is also evidence that the Russians have experimented similarly with gun-armed drones with Russian drone company Molot Aero sharing a video of their Vatya X8 drone equipped with a suppressed AK-74 in June. There is no evidence currently available to suggest this configuration has yet been used in the field. Photographs of the drone show a similar configuration to that assembled by Wild Hornets with a stock-less AK-74 mounted on its side on the underside of the drone. The footage shows the Molot Aero drone hovering over a range successfully shooting several balloon targets at relatively close range before it lands.

Most recently, in direct response to Wild Hornets’ video the Georigian Legion, a unit composed of volunteers from Georgia fighting for Ukraine, shared a short video of a drone armed with an RPG-7. The footage appears to show the launcher being tested but on speaking with the Georgian Legion they confirmed that the RPG-FPV has been used during combat operations. They have reportedly used it against vehicles, fixed positions and infantry but are looking to improve the design with better optics and increased engagement range.  

One key reason we probably haven’t seen more gun-equipped drones is that mounting a firearm is a relatively poor use of a heavy lift drone. These larger, more powerful drones can be better utilised as bombers carrying large payloads over significant distances. Bombs dropped on vehicles and defensive positions have more impact than a drone equipped with a rifle-calibre firearm. It is likely very difficult to accurately aim the weapon and the magazine capacity is limited. To aim effectively the drone will probably have to fly lower than it would when bombing, thus making it more susceptible to fire from the ground.  

Update – 11/9/24:

Update – 14/10/24: A Wall Street Journal article (by Isabel Coles) featured a photograph of a drone mounted with a suppressed AK74.

Update – 22/11/24:

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! You can also find us on the History of Weapons & War app. Thank you for your support!

Ukraine’s Newest Grenade Launcher – UKROP UGL-40

We have looked at a range of grenade launchers being used in Ukraine including standalone adaptations of GP-25s, the Ukrainian RG-1, the Russian DP-64, and a whole range of launchers that use the NATO standard 40x46mmSR rounds like the LMT M203 and the FN40GL.

In mid-August a new Ukrainian-produced 40mm launcher appeared, the UKROP UGL-40. This isn’t the first Ukrainian manufactured 40mm launcher, the Fort 600 has been in service for over a year and will be the topic for a future article/video of its own.

The UGL-40 is manufactured by UKROP, which is associated with Zbroyar. Intriguingly, in some of the available imagery of the UGL-40, LMT markings are clearly visible on the left side of the weapons receiver. It’s unclear if the launchers are imported from LMT, if they’re simply licensed on the LMT design or if a portion of the parts are manufactured by LMT and assembled by UKROP. While the barrel length and receiver design are very similar to that of the LMT M203 the stand-alone stock design differs. [H/T  – CaliFlori for spotting the markings.]

Update – February 2025: Having spoken to LMT representatives at SHOT 2025, it appears that after buying a significant number of LMT’s M203s Ukraine also bought all available components to assemble further launchers in-country. This included tubes, receivers and assorted components. These parts were combined with a chassis developed by UKROP, creating that UGL40.

LMT markings on a left side of the UGL-40’s receiver (via 12th Special Operations Brigade)

UKROP are best known for producing the UAR-10 and UAR-15 rifles used by elements of the Ukrainian armed forces. Sources suggest that the UGL-40 has a barrel length of 224mm, shorter than that of the M203 it’s based on, and in the under-barrel configuration it probably weighs around 3lbs (1.36 kg). The launcher is typically seen with a tangent sight attached to the left side of the weapon.

In retrospect and after some digging the earliest possible sighting of a UGL-40 I’ve seen dates from 20 March, in a photograph of a pair of members of Foxtrot Group with carbines equipped with under-barrel grenade launchers. Foxtrot Group, who are believed to be part of Ukraine’s SSO, posted two more photos of a team member equipped with an M4 carbine mounted with a UGL-40.

UGL-40 in standalone configuration (Western Savages)

The grenade launchers were next seen in an Instagram post on 5 July, by crab_zol, a member of the 3rd Assault Brigade, which showed him firing a UGL-40 from a trench. The launcher is seen attached to a UAR-15 rifle as an under-barrel grenade launcher.

On the 12 August, a photograph of the UGL-40 in its standalone configuration was shared online. Some sources suggest the image originated with personnel from the Ukrainian 36th Marine Brigade. The UGL-40 and UKROP markings can be clearly seen. The launcher appears to slot onto a rail of a stand-alone adaptor. The adaptor has a collapsing stock and a full length Picatinny top rail. A UGL-40 in the stand-alone configuration also appears in a kit photograph, the source of which I haven’t been able to confirm. It has been painted up and matches the UAR-15 seen below it.

UGL-40 mounted on a UAR-15 (Rubizh Brigade)

A week later on 19 August, Western Savages, a Separate Special Purpose Unit with “OMEGA” West, part of the Ukrainian National Guard’s special forces wing, shared a montage video on their new instagram page which included footage of the UGL-40 being fired during training. Speaking to Western Savages they noted that they’d received the UGL-40 a couple of months ago and had previously used the Fort-600. They noted the differences between the two launchers are negligible but the Fort-600 is a little heavier. This may suggest that the UGL-40 with its stock is slightly lighter than the Fort-600’s 2.20kg (4.85lbs). They described the UGL-40 as ‘accurate and reliable’ but have not yet used it on operations.

The 12th Special Operations Brigade “Azov” shared a video on 21 August, which featured a member of the brigade’s reconnaissance detachment discussing his kit. He shows a UAR-15 equipped with a UGL-40 along with a bandolier for carrying 40mm grenades.

UGL-40 mounted on a UAR-15 (3rd SABr)

Most recently, on the 23 August, photographs of members of the Neptune reconnaissance group were shared with one of the operators pictured holding a rifle equipped with a UGL-40. On the same day the Rubizh Brigade also posted photographs showing personnel equipped with the new grenade launchers attached to UAR-15 rifles. One of the photographs of a soldier, wearing what appears to be a reconnaissance platoon patch, also gives a good look at the launcher’s markings.

It seems that the UGL-40s have so far been issued to a mixture of units including those from both the Ukrainian Army and the National Guard. Unsurprisingly they have only been seen paired with AR-15/M16 pattern rifles and are most typically seen in the under-barrel configuration rather than as a standalone. From confirmed sightings it appears that the UGL-40 has been in service since at least Spring 2024.

Update – 2/10/24:

A photo submitted to Ukrainian military page, Ukrainian_Special_Military of Members of 12th Special Operations Brigade “Azov” of the National Guard operating in the forests of Luhansk region. One individual has a UAR-15 with what is likely a UBL40.

Update – 29/10/25:

A photo of a member of 1st combat group of the special purpose intelligence squad of the 12th Brigade NGU with a nicely painted up standalone UGL-40 and a UAR-15.

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! You can also find us on the History of Weapons & War app. Thank you for your support!

RPL-20 – Russia’s New Light Machine Gun

I’m excited to share this collaboration with firearms researcher Deni Almaskhanov, of Just Guns. Deni had the chance to attend the Army 2024 exposition in Moscow earlier this month. He has very kindly shared some great video and information about the latest version of Kalashnikov Concern’s RPL-20 light machine gun. 

The RPL-20 at ARMY 2024 (Deni Almaskhanov)

The Russian armed forces haven’t used belt-fed LMGs since 1959 when the RPD was replaced by the RPK. The RPK-74M has been considered obsolescent since 2011. Kalashnikov Concern began exploring an RPK replacement in the 2010s with the RPK-16. The RPK-16 failed to satisfy the military due to issues with overheating and the reliability of its 96-rounds drum magazines. The RPL is a direct follow-up to the ‘Kipchak’ program during which the now extremely rare RPK-16 was trialed. 

The RPL-20 was initially unveiled four years ago during the Army 2020 exposition but was stated to still be in development. 

RPL-20 in its 2023 iteration (Kalashnikov Concern)

The RPL is a belt-fed light machine gun, chambered in 5.45×39mm, it feeds from metal non-disintegrating belts, carried in 100- or 200-rounds textile boxes, with a quick attach/detach mechanism. It fires from an open bolt but does not have a quick change barrel, although it is possible to replace the barrel during the disassembly of the weapon. This aligns the RPL with the simultaneously emerging Western concept of the light assault machine guns like the FN EVOLYS and the Knight’s Armament LAMG amongst others.

Russian patent diagram for the RPL-20 (Russian Patent Office)

Deni explains that the lower receiver is “fixed with a pin in the front end and a latch in the rear end… the latch is pressed, unlocking the pivoting movement of the lower receiver. Such a design was chosen to address the common requirement for all the modern firearms – a continuous top Picatinny rail that would allow for reliable mounting of accessories and aiming devices.” The receiver can be opened this way to reload, however, a faster and more expedient method of reloading the RPL-20 is to simply push a new belt through the firearm’s feed block and pulling the starter tab until the first round seats. 

The RPL-20’s pistol grip and selector (Deni Almaskhanov)

The RPL-20 has a 2-position adjustable gas block mounted onto the barrel. Kalsashnikov Concern’s chief-designer Sergey Urzhumtsev describes the action of the machine gun as ‘an upside-down PKM’, but there are some important mechanical differences, such as the fact that the RPL-20 uses a push-through belt, unlike the PKM which pulls each cartridge backwards from the belt before chambering it. 

On the right side of the receiver, the RPL has a non-reciprocating T-shaped charging handle mounted onto a strong coil spring that is intended to prevent the charging handle from bending the weapon’s receiver or breaking the handle in the event of a heavy strike against it.

There are selector switches on both the left and right sides of the receiver only and the weapon fires in fully automatic fire only. The pistol grip and the buttstock are the same as those being also used on the 2nd and 3rd generations of the AK-12. The buttstock differs slightly in that it has an adjustable cheek rest and a foldable shoulder rest that can be flipped up over the shoulder. The gun on display was also seen with a cant-adjustable vertical front grip attached to the 6 o’clock rail.

The RPL-20’s charging handle (Deni Almaskhanov)

There is a small Picatinny rail at the muzzle end of the barrel intended for attaching the bipod in the forward position. With an alternate position on the handguard giving the user some tactical flexibility.
The handguard is not a separate piece but a continuation of the upper receiver and it is connected to the barrel via the gas block. The weapon has a threaded muzzle device to allow the fitting of suppressors.

There are some notable external changes from the earlier iteration of the RPL. The weapon now has fixed front and rear sight protectors rather than folding iron sights. It also has some changes to the receiver geometry with the receiver no longer having a step but a slope ahead of the breech and more, angled, ventilation holes in the receiver.  

RPL-20 as introduced in 2020 (Kalashnikov Concern)

The RPL-20 is reportedly undergoing state trials this year, so its remains to be seen if the light assault machine gun concept is one which the Russian MoD wishes to pursue. The nature of the war in Ukraine means that urban fighting and trench clearing have become increasingly important, perhaps this is a niche into which the RPL would fit.

My special thanks again to Deni for sharing this brilliant footage and information with me so I can bring you guys this video. Please do check out Deni’s pages – Telegram, Instagram, Youtube.

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! You can also find us on the History of Weapons & War app. Thank you for your support!

Who Let the Dogs Out: Robot Dogs in Ukraine

Since the February 2022 invasion the war in Ukraine has been characterised by the use of drones and remote systems. While we’ve seen aerial drone use expand and evolve extremely rapidly and naval drones have proven themselves very effective, ground based drone use has been much slower to evolve with unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) seeing some limited use delivering explosive charges, mines and taking on logistical roles.

One unmanned ground system which I didn’t expect to see is the use of ‘robot dogs’ (робот-собака). These quadrupedal, remotely operated systems were seen for the first time earlier this month, most notably with Ukraine’s 28th Mechanised Brigade.

A Unitree Go-2 robot dog being tested in Ukraine (via social media)

The first footage of the robot dogs in Ukraine was shared by members of Kurt & Company (a unit with the 28th Mechanised Brigade) on 2 August, it shows one of the dogs being demonstrated in a field navigating though fields and woodland, through brush and righting itself when it got stuck trying to climb over a fallen branch.

Another video appeared on 5 August, with the robot dog seen moving along a bombed out residential street and being carried by its operator, a member of Kurt & Company. The footage does not show the dog operating inside any buildings. The post claims the footage was filmed in Toretske, Donetsk.

On the 8 August, France24, published an article based on a demonstration of one of the robot dogs during which the model of dog was referred to as “BAD 1” and a second model “BAD 2” was referenced but described as more advanced and “could not be shown for security reasons”. The article also noted that if one of the dogs ever fell “into Russian hands… an emergency switch allows the operator to erase all its data.” AFP shared a short video from the demonstration which noted that the drones were provided by BRIT Alliance, a UK-based security company which specialises in deploying drone systems. Interestingly, some articles describe the robot dogs as ‘British built’, however, they actually appear to be Chinese Unitree Go-2 robot dogs. The Unitree name can be seen below the dog’s camera sensor in the AFP video, as well as a Kurt & Company sticker on its right side.

Ukrainian troops of the 28th Mechanised Brigade with a Go-2 robot dog (via social media)

The Unitree Go-2 has a number of interesting features including the ability to map areas using LIDAR scanning, an AI mode that helps it navigate complex terrain and a live camera feed. Unitree’s site lists them as available from $1,850 for a Go-2 air and $3,050 for a Go-2 Pro. The Go-2 Pro model weighs around 15kg, has an 8kg payload, a battery life of up to 2 hours and a top speed of just under 8mph. Intriguingly back in 2022, Russia displayed the M-81, a robot dog armed with an RPG-26, at the Army 2022 defence exposition. The M-81 was actually based on Unitree’s Go-1 robot dog.

A further video was shared on 12 August, the drone is seen camouflaged with what may be a Ukrainian digicam shirt. In the same video the word ‘B.A.D.2.’ can be seen stenciled on the body of the dog.

On the 14 August, Kurt & Company shared a series of photos of a robot dog and operator with the caption [machine translated] “Better to buy robots than lose soldiers”. In several of the photos the dog has a backpack and radio strapped and taped to its back. On examination of the images this dog appears to be of a different design and resembles the DeepRobotics Lite3 Venture model, DeepRobotics are another Chinese manufacturer. This model weighs in at 12.2kg and has a 2 hour endurance.

A DeepRobotics Lite3 Venture demonstrated in Ukraine, August 2024 (via Ukrainian Army)

The same day the brigade’s official telegram page shared another video of the robot dog being demonstrated with the caption [machine translated]:

“Asymmetric responses are effective against the enemy’s numerical superiority in manpower, and they are possible thanks to technologies and innovative approaches in the conduct of hostilities.
As an example – this robot dog at the service of “Kurt&Company”.
He has many talents and a wide potential for use on the battlefield. Just as drones once changed warfare, so our four-legged robotic friends will influence the course of hostilities.”

The short video included clips of the dog on the move, doing backflips, and walking along a bombed out residential street.

Also on the 14 August, Ukrainian Army social media channels also shared the same photographs previously shared with a caption quoting the commander of Kurt & Company as saying: “Such a dog should be in every unit”.

Left: DeepRobotics Lite3 Venture
Right: Unitree Go-2

It’s unclear how many of the robot dogs might be in use in Ukraine, or if they’ve been used on operations yet. A BILD article published on 14 August, claimed that as many as 30 have been deployed but there’s no further evidence to support this. A Новини ФАКТ article stated they had been used operationally in Toretsk but this remains unconfirmed.

While the quadrupedal design of the robot dogs means they are, in theory at least, more capable of climbing stairs than tracked or wheeled UGVs their utility remains to be seen. They have less capability to carry payloads and its unclear if they’ll be used in a one-way role with explosive payloads – though given every other unmanned system in Ukraine has, it is probably a just matter of time. Unlike some of the simpler tracked and wheeled UGVs the Go-2 robot dogs are probably more expensive, harder to maintain and have a larger profile making them more vulnerable to enemy fire. It has been noted that they will also likely be utilised in reconnaissance of enemy trenches ahead of assault teams but again evidence of this has not yet surfaced.

A Unitree Go-2 robot dog being tested in Ukraine (via social media)

It seems that the role the dogs would be best used for is reconnaissance in urban areas where aerial drones can’t easily navigate inside structures, removing the need to send troops to recce buildings to locate the enemy. It seems that this is the role that the Ukrainians have in mind for the dogs. While China, the US and a range of other militaries have tested robot dogs, including the mounting of small arms and even light anti-armour weapons, if they are utilised in combat in Ukraine this will represent a battlefield first for this type of system.

Update – 20/8/24: An another video of one of the Chinese Robot Dogs, a Unitree Go-2, in Ukraine posted on 19 August.

Update – 8/9/24: Some additional video featuring both models of robot dog previously identified.

Update – 15/1/25:

RoboCopDog.A robot dog with what appears to be a thermal camera with the Rapid Operational Response Unit (KORD) of the Ukrainian National Police.More on these robot dogs in #Ukraine here: armourersbench.com/2024/08/16/w…

— Matthew Moss – Armourer's Bench (@matthewmoss.bsky.social) 2025-01-15T12:27:16.637Z

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! You can also find us on the History of Weapons & War app. Thank you for your support!

Walk Around: M3 Stuart Tank

A couple of weeks ago at the excellent We Have Ways Festival I spotted one of my favourite tanks, an M3 Stuart. The Stuart’s wartime service is pretty fascinating, seeing extensive use across every major theatre. It entered service in 1941 and nearly 23,000 were manufactured by 1944.

The Stuart is a light tank and the M3A1 variant, seen here, was equipped with a .30 calibre Browning bow gun, an M6 37mm gun and another co-axial Browning M1919 .30 calibre machine gun. Powered by a Continental W-670 radial engine it could travel at speeds up to 35 mph (on the road) and 18 mph (off-road) and weighed in at 15.2 metric tons (16.7 US/short tons). Its hull is riveted while the turret is welded, in terms of armour protection the M3 has rolled face-hardened steel armour 1 inch (22mm) thick on its sides and rear and 1.5 to 1.75 inch (38-44mm) on its front glacis.

Right-Front quarter: M3 Stuart (Matthew Moss)

By 1942 it was largely fulfilling a cavalry scout/armoured reconnaissance and infantry support role. Unable to go toe-to-toe with heavier German tanks it continued in the aforementioned recce and support roles but found a niche in the Far East and Pacific theatres. It was also provided to the Soviet Union as Lend-Lease aid. This meant that the Stuart equipped armoured units in allied armies including: the US, UK, the USSR, Commonwealth nations including Australia, Canada, New Zealand and India. They were also used by Free Polish and Chinese forces and the Free French Army.

A look at the Stuart’s Continental W-670 radial engine (Matthew Moss)

The tank at the Festival was badged up with the battle axe insignia of the 1st Australian Armoured Brigade Group which was operational from August 1943, after the 1st Australian Armoured Division was disbanded. I believe its part of the Tanks-Alot collection and they have some video of the tank on the move, but I didn’t have a chance to speak to the owners – they do have an interesting YouTube channel.

Front: M3 Stuart (Matthew Moss)

Just a short article/video looking a pretty cool light tank that’s often forgotten alongside the M4 Sherman and M3 Lee. It’s not everyday you get to have a close up look at a cool tank on a beautiful day.

Special thanks to my friend Adam Blackmore-Heal for some additional footage of the Stuart on the move, check out his channel here, he is a phenomenal videographer.

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! You can also find us on the History of Weapons & War app. Thank you for your support!

Bibliography:

M3 & M5 Stuart Light Tank 1940-45, S. Zaloga (1999)

Light Tank M3 Stuart, Tank Encyclopedia (source)

Ukrainian Marines Deploy RBS-17/Hellfire Shore Defence Missiles

The RBS-17 has been in Ukrainian service for quite some time with Sweden announcing in June 2022, that they would provide the missiles. The RBS-17 was a development of the AGM-114 Hellfire, entering service in the the early 1990s. It is a man-portable missile which weighs 48kg in addition to the launcher, firing system and laser targeting module. It is typically operated in the field by a five man team – two operating the laser targeting system and three on the weapon itself.

Check out our earlier video on the RBS-17 in Ukraine here

We first saw the RBS-17 in use in the field in a video posted in October 2022, by a page called ‘Bigcats’, the lo-res clip shows the launch of a pair of missiles. In December 2023, the Swedish government published an article and video about Ukraine’s use of the RBS-17 and the training the Swedish armed forces provided on the system. Most recently in May 2024, a clip of an Armenian volunteer unit, NEMESIS, showed a team operating an RBS-17. The video shows NEMESIS team members carrying a missile to the launcher, this gives an indication of just how ‘man portable’ they are. They load the missile and then take cover in the nearby tree-line. We can then see one man manning the control unit and the missile is launched.

It is worth noting that Norway has also provided it’s Hellfire Shore Defense System, which is externally very similar in appearance to the RBS-17. Some of the missiles in use are likely Norwegian HSDS.

Since then we have had a series of excellent clips which are amongst the most detailed so far. The clips were posted to various TikTok accounts and show a team, which appears to be attached to one of the Ukrainian Marine brigades, operating the missile system.

My colleague Weapons_Illustrated shared a series of videos he found on a Ukrainian serviceman’s Tiktok channel which were posted in summer 2024 but have since largely been removed. One simply shows a launch of a missile filmed relatively close to the launcher. Another pans along a missile body showing a message scrawled on the casing and also the missile’s lot number ‘98001’. While slightly blurred one Bofors sticker appears to read ‘Norwegian Hellfire Shore Defense Missile ‘ The video concludes showing a night launch across a body of water before cutting to a thermal camera showing an impact downrange. Another video shows the missile control system before cutting to showing a missile launch and then a clip of a strike on a large building which has its roof blown off. A video posted by the same channel on 20 July included a new launch video showing a missile being fired before cutting to a screen showing the destruction of a building near a large body of water. The landscape visible may suggest the footage was filmed along the Dnieper River, possibly near Krynky.

With further research I came across another affiliated account which had a number of videos showing the launch of RBS-17s dating back to January 2023. The first video posted on 3 January shows a launch of an RBS-17 with a picture-in-picture video of the operator at the launch control terminal. On the 5 March another video was posted from the same position, when the videos were actually filmed is difficult to confirm, this time the video also concluded with a clip of the impact of the missile on a target, a large building, downrange. On 13 May, a short video of the RBS-17s control terminal lit up was shared. A video posted by the account on 23 October, includes a slowed down clip of a launch and a clip showing a missile hit a target building.

The most recent video, posted on 11 December, features the launch of an RBS-17 filmed with multiple camera angles. One shows the video from the launch control station with a picture-in-picture view of the operator at the controls as well as a show showing the missile leaving the launcher, which has been positioned on a road. The video concludes with some overwatch drone feed footage of an impact on a building.

Update – 15/08/24:

One of the accounts which previously shared launch videos also recently shared a new video of a missile being launched from the edge of a field. Given earlier videos posted by the same individual showed HSDS markings this missile may also be a Norwegian HSDS.

Update – 8/9/24: New footage, shared in mid-August by Ukrainian marines operating a RBS-17/Hellfire SDS, geolocated to the Kherson region.

Special thanks to my colleague Weapons Illustrated who found the initial recent videos of the RBS-17 in action. Check out his project tracking various weapon systems seen in Ukraine here.

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! You can also find us on the History of Weapons & War app. Thank you for your support!

Ukraine’s Rare RG-1 Grenade Launcher

Way back in October 2022 video of the extremely rare Ukrainian RG-1 circulated online thanks to Yuri, an American member of the Ukrainian armed forces (known as Nucking_Futs_Yuri, best known as for his combat footage of him manning an M2 Browning and firing numerous AT-4s from a HMMWV). Yuri and his colleague Kaiser, a German volunteer, very kindly shared their videos of the RG-1 filmed when they had the chance to fire the weapon during some range time. As far as I can tell those videos remain one of the few occasions that the weapons have been seen during the ongoing fighting following Russia’s invasion. Since October 2022, I’ve been holding off on making a video about the RG-1 in the hopes more imagery might appear – there have only been two more sightings.

Yuri with an RG-1 at the range, October 2022 (via Yuri)

The RG-1 “Piston” (РГ-1 “Поршень”) was developed as a cost effective force multiplier, to provide the firepower of an AGS-17 in a man portable package. Information on the weapon is scarce and I’ve had to dig through a number archived Ukrainian news articles and other sources to pull together some of the story of the RG-1.

A 2014 article from UkraineIndustrial.info suggests the project to develop the RG-1 was launched in 1999 and continued until 2007.  It was reportedly developed by the Yuzhny Machine-Building Plant. A.M. Makarov with the design team including Alekseev Yury Sergeevich, Serbin Vladimir Viktorovich, Zagreba Alexander Ivanovich, and Mezhuev Nikolay Nikolaevich

RG-1 grenade launcher with red dot sight mounted on quadrant sight bar (Yuzhmash)

The RG-1 is a self-loading grenade launcher which fires 30×29mm VOG-17-pattern grenades. Some sources refer to specially made, lighter grenades made for the RG-1. Numerous sources also refer to a training round and a round designed for use against light armoured vehicles. The ammunition was reportedly developed by the Pavlograd Mechanical Plant, which is run by Yuzhmash. The RG-1’s relatively long barrel allows it to engage targets at ranges out to around 800m. The weapon does not appear to have a gas piston and it’s barrel is fixed suggesting it isn’t recoil operated. It may be gas blowback operated, though it’s unclear if it has any sort of bolt delaying system in place. The weapon has a large main spring soaking up the recoil as well as a large top-ported muzzle brake.   

The weapon’s weight is reportedly around 12kg (26.45lbs) loaded and 10.8kg unloaded. It has a 30cm (11.8in) barrel, has an integral bipod and feeds from a five round box magazine. The box magazine rocks forward to lock into the receiver, with the paddle magazine release located forward of the magazine (the reverse of the standard AK position). To load the weapon the bolt has to be pulled to the rear, but with no bolt hold open device it has to be held to the rear manually. There is a quadrant sight on the left side of the weapon’s receiver with a Picatinny rail for mounting optics. The buttstock has a rubber pad and from the available imagery there appears to be two designs of stock. 

Uprom.info reported in 2018, that as of Spring 2017, the RG-1 was not in full-scale production but prototypes had been undergoing field trials with the 79th Airmobile Brigade during fighting in Donbas, as early as 2016.

30×29mm VOG-17-pattern grenades in RG-1 magazine (via Yuri)

Speaking to Yuri in 2022, he noted that his unit didn’t bother using the RG-1 as they had plenty of 40mm grenade launchers in inventory, including then-newly arrived M320s. Yuri explained that “the RG-1 was a stop-gap weapon to give the average man the capability to fire VOGs without having to get an AGS into position.” The low velocity 40mm grenade launchers are smaller, lighter, easier to carry and, according to Yuri, have better range an accuracy than the RG-1.  

A second sighting of an RG-1 came in mid August 2023, when another video of the weapon being fired on a range was shared. The most recent sighting came in October 2023 when a curious photograph of General Kyrylo Budanov, chief of Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence, was published showing an RG-1 in the corner of his office. 

Gen. Budanov poses with Joker paining next to an RG-1 (via social media)

The RG-1 is an extremely interesting weapon. Designed to fulfil a tactical niche between the common GP-25 single-shot under-barrel grenade launcher and the heavy AGS-17 automatic grenade launcher. Essentially the RG-1 was intended to be light enough for the operator to manoeuvre and act as an integral support element within the squad. However, in the current phase of the war the proliferation of low velocity 40mm grenades has largely rendered the RG-1 unnecessary. If you’ve seen other imagery of RG-1s in use please do let me know.

Specifications for the RG-1 [assorted sources]:

Calibre – 30×29mm
Rate of fire – 30 RPM
Effective firing range – 800 meters
Weight (unloaded) – 10.8kg
Length – 905mm
Barrel length – 300mm
Initial grenade speed – 185m/s

Update – 20/11/24: Tysk shared a photo of a 3rd Assault Brigade member posing wth an RG-1, date unknown.

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! You can also find us on the History of Weapons & War app. Thank you for your support!

3D Printed Evolution of Drone Munitions

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 the use of drones for reconnaissance and tactical missions has evolved so rapidly it has come to characterise the war. The tactic of dropping hand grenades from commercial drones has evolved into the use of larger drones and larger munitions and the use of first person view (or FPV) one-way, kamikaze drones.

L-R: V3 XL ‘Big Mac’, V2, V1 & small VOG-sized casing (via Joe MacDonald)

Joe MacDonald, a British volunteer currently fighting in Ukraine, has kindly shared a short video showing some of the newest munitions that have been in use with his drone team for some time. Joe has led the development of a series of munitions of varying sizes. These range from small 450g bombs up to 3.5kgs which are dropped from a range of drones, small Mavic-type drones up to the ‘Baba Yaga’ heavy bomber drones.

This short video from Joe just goes to illustrate the importance of 3D printing in the development and manufacture of drone dropped munitions. The 3D printed casings are loaded with explosives and shrapnel which can then be fuzed ready for deployment in the field. The 3D printed designs have only grown more sophisticated, evolving originally from printed trail sections and nose cones.

3D printed drone munition casings with tail assemblies (via Joe MacDonald)

Importantly, the use of 3D printing allows for the casings and tails to be standardised and consistent. The 3.5kg V3 takes up to 24 hours to print, they could be printed faster but Joe explained that this sacrifices rigidity and robustness and he prefers the munitions his unit uses to be soldier-proof and capable of standing up to handling. Joe also noted that packing the casings with plastic explosive takes force which the cases have to be able to stand up to. While there are plenty of other case and tail designs in use the designs Joe led the refinement and development have been used by numerous Ukrainian brigades.

Special thanks to Joe for sharing the video and taking the time to explain how drone munitions are assembled, I highly recommend checking out Joe’s channel, Big Mac’s Battle Blogs, he regularly shares some really interesting insights.

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! You can also find us on the History of Weapons & War app. Thank you for your support!

Anti-Tank Mines Used As Satchel Charges

In recent weeks there have been a spate videos showing Russian troops using TM-62 anti-tank mines as improvised satchel charges. We’ve already seen TM-62s used as drone dropped munitions and as demolition charges. The videos shared most recently show the dramatic effect that the TM-62s can have on structures. But they aren’t the first videos of the mines being used in this way to emerge from the conflict.

Back in April 2023, overwatch drone footage was shared which showed a Ukrainian soldier using a satchel charge, which appears to be a TM-62, to destroy a Russian fighting position. The charge detonates about 10 seconds after it’s tossed into the position. Almost a year later in early March 2024, another piece of drone footage showed troops from the 2nd mechanised battalion of the 30th mechanised brigade destroying what appears to be the entrance to a cellar near Syn’kivka, in Kharkiv Oblast, with a TM-62 satchel charge.

A Russian soldier posts a TM-62 through a window (via social media)

Several days later another video showed a member of the 81st Airmobile Brigade using a TM-62 to destroy Russian dugouts near Bilohorivka. In the video a Ukrainian serviceman can be seen lighting a length of safety fuze which appears to be taped to the body of the mine. He then throws the mine into a hole in the roof of a dugout and takes cover – approximately 20 seconds later it detonates. Several grenades are thrown into the dugout and another mine is brought up, we can see the mine is being carried by its attachable webbing carrying handle. The safety fuze on the mine is lit and thrown into a covered section of trench and detonated approximately 22 seconds later.

On 12 April, the 109th Territorial Defense Brigade shared video of urban operations in which Ukrainian troops, with covering fire from HMMWVs, used satchel charges to destroy several buildings. The drone footage of the operation isn’t clear enough to make out if the satchel charges used are TM-62 based but the charges clearly have a significant blast effect.

Depending on the variant TM-62s mine are packed with 7.5kg (17lbs) of explosive and is normally centrally fuzed by a mechanical MVCh-62 pressure fuze. It is a High-Explosive Blast (HE-Blast) mine typically with a TNT filling. While extremely potent they aren’t designed to be thrown, weighing 9.5–10kg (20-22lbs). 

A Ukrainian soldier lights a safety fuze to ignite a TM-62 (via social media)

While in some videos its clear that some sort of cord fuze was used to initiate the mine in some of the more recent footage it appears that grenade fuzes may have been used. This gives the user very little time to escape the blast radius.

On 2 July, a Russian telegram channel shared the first of several videos of Russian troops using TM-62s to clear positions. The location of the video isn’t stated but it shows Russian soldiers tossing a pair of what appear to be a TM-62Ps (which have a red-orange Bakelite case). Two days later another drone video showed [better quality version] a Russian soldier run up to a building and throw a TM-62 through a ground floor window, he runs clear but the mine detonates just three seconds later. It’s unclear from the video when he initiated the fuze, likely before approaching the building. The charge effectively collapses the corner of the two storey structure’s outer wall.

A TM-62 satchel charge destroys the corner of a building (via social media)

Russia telegram channel WarGonzo shared another video on 5 July, reportedly filmed in Niu-York, Ukraine, showing a member of the 9th Separate Guards Motor Rifle Brigade using a TM-62 to destroy a building which was said to have been occupied by Ukrainian troops. The Russian soldier can be seen pulling a pin on what may be a grenade fuze just before throwing the mine through a window. The mine detonates just three seconds later completely destroying the small building.

Another spectacular video was shared on around 7 July, showing two Russian soldiers deploying a pair of TM-62s against a large building, the location of which isn’t stated. They are seen approaching the building, pulling fuze pins and tossing the mines in. As they turn and run the mines detonate just three seconds later demolishing the building.

While in most of these videos the men deploying the mines appear to get clear they do beg the age old question of whether some of the soldiers deploying the mines are inevitably ‘hoist by their own petards’ – the etymology of that phrase being a reference the the dangerous business of 16th century sappers being killed or injured while deploying Petards, a historic equivalent to a modern demolition or satchel charge.

16th century engineer deploying a petard (via Library of Congress)

It’s clear from the available imagery that both Russia and Ukraine have utilised TM-62s as ad-hoc satchel or demolition charges since at least early 2023 (and likely earlier). It’s unclear how widespread of a practice the use of the mines is but it is clearly highly effective and while it puts the user deploying the mine at significant risk it appears an effective way of clearing enemy positions if the charge can be delivered successfully.

Update – 30/09/24: Footage of what may be an assault demolition, of an apartment block in Toretsk, using TM-62s.

Update – 21/10/24: A member of Ukraine’s Russian Volunteer Corps employs a TM-62 satchel charge during fighting in Vovchansk.

Update – 5/12/24:

Omega Team, an SOF unit with Ukraine’s National Guard, employ multiple TM-62s during a hit and run raid on a Russian strong point in an apartment block.

Update – 12/12/24:

An recent video of Ukrainian combatants using multiple TM-62 (or similar) anti-armour mines (минированию) as satchel charges in Toretsk was shared. The video shows half a dozen charges comprised of a pair of mines taped together with a delay fuze. These charges are thrown into the ground floor of a damaged building.

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! You can also find us on the History of Weapons & War app. Thank you for your support!

Ukraine Captures First Turtle Tank

Since my last article/video on Russia’s ‘turtle tanks’ the adapted vehicles have continued to be used on several fronts but on Monday, 17 June Ukrainian forces captured their first turtle tank intact.

Known by numerous names by both sides including ‘Blyatmobiles’ (Блятьмобиль) and ‘assault garages’ (штурмовые гаражи), ‘Tsar Mangals’ (Царь мангал) or simply ‘sheds’ (сарай) the tanks are characterised by them being equipped with large counter-FPV shells made from readily available sheet metal (and other non-standard materials) and are sometimes equipped with electronic warfare jammers to provide additional protection against drones and sometimes with mine clearing devices such a mine rollers or ploughs. They appear to have been developed to provide improvised breaching vehicles capable of penetrating Ukrainian minefields, withstand drone attacks and in some cases deliver troops to an objective.

Front of the Turtle Tank captured in the field (via ArmyInform)

From posts on Ukrainian social media the tank was reportedly captured by troops from the 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade but the vehicle was first encountered near Klishchiivka by soldiers of the 244th battalion of the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade that had been seconded to the 5th Assault Brigade.

The turtle tank allegedly became lost in the Klishchiivka area and saw an M113 APC belonging to the 2nd Battalion of the 5th Assault Brigade and began following it. When the M113 crew spotted the enemy tank it attempted to hide. The tank, however, continued to follow and on reaching the M113 a member of the turtle tank’s crew said to be the driver got out to ask for directions. He was captured by medics of the 244th Battalion. From the footage available it appears that the following morning troops of the 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade approached the tank and captured an undisclosed number of Russian troops who were travelling in the rear of the turtle tank’s counter-FPV shell. Despite numerous sources and accounts the timeline of the tank’s capture remains somewhat unclear.

The immobilised Turtle Tank captured in the field (via 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade)

Subsequently released footage from a 22nd Mechanised Brigade drone appears to show the Turtle Tank being damaged by a drone dropped munition before it was captured. The post with the video claimed that the turtle tank’s crew became disorientated after the drone attack and mistakenly drove towards Ukrainian lines. Lt. Colonel Serhiy Misyura, of ArmyInform, also noted that the vehicle was struck by an FPV. Lt.Col. Misyura claims that the drone dropped munition detonated next to one of the tank’s road wheels and immobilised it. After it was captured Ukrainian troops were able to get the tank moving again and drive it to the rear.

Drone footage then shows the capture of the tank’s crew and the vehicle moving off towards the Ukrainian rear. Teoyaomiquu shared a short clip filmed by a member of the 93rd Mechanized Brigade which showed the captured tank passing by, the 22nd Mechanised Brigade’s flag can be seen flying from the top of the tank. In a photograph of the tank and some of the men who captured it the same flag can be seen. Another piece of footage showing the tank close up also appeared online on the 18th June. The video shows the front, rear and left side of the tank’s counter-FPV shell.

Right side of the captured Turtle Tank (via ArmyInform)

On the 19th June, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade shared a short video showing the confused captured tank driver sat in the rear of an M113. On the 20th June, ArmyInform, the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ news outlet published a video on their YouTube channel giving us an up close look at the captured tank in detail during which Lt. Colonel Misyura describes it as a ‘marvel of modern Russian engineering’.

The Ukrainian Army were quick to capitalise on the propaganda value of finally capturing one of the Tsar Mangal (Tsar’s Barbaque) / assault sheds in tact, at the time of publication the video has over 650,000 views on YouTube alone.

Examining The Turtle

Since late April we have seen many variations on the ‘turtle tank’ theme, this example is certainly one of the least refined. Firstly, the tank does not appear to have been equipped with mine clearing kit as some of the other tanks have. However, it has been outfitted with what appear to be some sort of EW jammer to counter drones. Additionally, we can clearly see several UDSh smoke generators, held in a pair of brackets on either side of the shell. These have sometimes been misidentified as standard TM-62 anti-tank mines but the UDSh is a smoke generator which mimics the mine’s shape for training purposes. In this case they have been repurposed to enable the tank to create a mobile smoke screen. According to CAT-UXO the UDSh can be initiated electronically or manually and once ignited discharges smoke for 8-10 minutes. In the ArmyInform video it is also noted that the Kontakt ERA blocks seen on the tank’s glacis are empty.

Ukrainian troops pose in fron of the captured Turtle Tank (via social media)

The tank itself is a T-62M and according to Ukrainian sources the turret is fixed in place and the tank carried no ammunition for its main gun, making it largely defenceless in isolation from supporting elements. The counter-FPV shell is crudely assembled made up of a mish-mash of materials including metal sheeting which ranges from rusted bare metal to various worn paint colours, wire fencing and metal caging. There also appears to be rubber matting attached front and rear to help keep dust down. The top of the shell over the tank’s engine deck appears incomplete and may have been damaged. In the ArmyInform video which shows the area in-detail it is clear that the counter-FPV shell’s support struts were welded directly to the top of the hull and a number of large and small shrapnel holes in the shell are visible.

Top of the captured Turtle Tank (via ArmyInform)

It appears that between when the vehicle was captured and when the ArmyInform video was filmed the Ukrainian have removed the assemblies, which may have been EW jammers, on the front of the tank. Its unclear how long the adapted tank has been in service but their is evidence of past repairs and there are numerous spray painted slogans on its panels including ‘god is with us’, ‘Hero-Z’ and ‘154 RUS’ (a possible joke reference to Russian vehicle registration plates). If this is the case it might hint at the origins of the Russian crew. ‘154’ is a registration code for the Novosibirsk Oblast which is the home of the 41st Combined Arms Army. In one clip of the tank it also has what appears to be a stolen ‘1941’ sign (possibly from a Great Patriotic War memorial) attached to the rear of its shell.

Check out our previous article/videos on the turtle tanks here.

Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!