Tuesday’s drone strike on Moscow highlighted once again the extension of the war in Ukraine to the Russian capital, putting the city’s air defenses and the Kremlin’s attempts to adapt to a new type of conflict into the spotlight.
Since the 1980s, Moscow has been surrounded by a complex air defense system called the Amur, designed to protect the capital from ICBMs and nuclear bombers – a threat vastly different from the reality of Russia’s modern war against Ukraine.
Ukraine has denied responsibility for Tuesday’s drone strike and another this month that targeted the Kremlin, but such attacks are on the rise on Russian territory. This has forced Russia to adopt its defense systems to counter a less deadly but much more numerous type of ordnance.
In January, without any official explanation, Russia began deploying new military equipment around Moscow, including on prominent buildings such as the Defense Ministry. Military experts identified the weapons as the S-400, Russia’s most advanced surface-to-air missile system, and the Pantsir S-1, which in its most common form is a truck with a relatively simple anti-aircraft missile launcher.
According to the Defense Ministry, Pantsir missiles shot down five of the eight drones that attacked Moscow on Tuesday morning. A video posted to social media on Tuesday and confirmed by the New York Times showed a Pantsir system launching a missile on the outskirts of Moscow.
According to the Ministry of Defence, the other three drones were disabled by what is known as “radio-electronic warfare”. The ministry didn’t provide any details, but has been installing an electronic jamming system called Pole-21 on satellite masts since 2016. These systems block satellite navigation signals, causing drones and other electronically guided weapons to lose control.
As a result, Russian officials – including President Vladimir V. Putin – have sought to portray the attack on the capital as a triumph of Russian defenses.
“It is clear what needs to be done to increase the density of the capital’s air defense systems,” Putin said in response to the attack. “And that’s exactly what we’re going to do.”
A potential problem: The effectiveness of the Pantsir and Pole systems decreases sharply in densely populated areas saturated with satellite data, said Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Moscow-based security research group CAST. In order to effectively counter drone strikes, the Russian military must try to disable them before they reach the city limits – a difficult task given the size of the country.
Also, defending airspace in urban areas is more difficult than near the front lines, where most aircraft are military aircraft. In cities, soldiers must track civilian aircraft, such as planes and helicopters, while also checking for radar blips from much smaller aircraft, such as unmanned drones.
“Previously, air defense systems near cities could take out anything smaller than a helicopter,” said Ian Williams of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank. “Small drones may have radar that returns the size of a goose. So if you set your radars to look for enemy drones, you’ll see a lot of birds too.”
The Pantsir air defense vehicles spotted around Moscow entered service with the Russian army in 2003, according to CSIS, and have since been modernized. Armed with short-range infrared seeker missiles and a 30mm radar-guided gun, the Pantsir was built to escort mechanized forces like an armored column, Williams said, providing a “bubble of protection” while the convoy moved .
They were designed and built before small drones became a major battlefield threat, Mr Williams said, and while they had some ability to shoot down drones, they weren’t optimized for it. Attackers could also use the terrain to disguise the approach of low-flying aircraft such as drones, he added.
Those responsible for Tuesday’s attack, he said, appeared to be “exploiting the limitations of the Pantsir system and other air defense systems around Moscow.”
Oleg Matsnev and Riley Mellen contributed coverage.
— Anatoly Kurmanaev and John Ismay