May 25, 2025
By Frank (OFP)
In this day and age, it’s never a mistake to question any claims, stories, or reports that originate in the crime syndicate. Of course, being wary of anything that is being reported over this war is never a bad idea, regardless from which side it comes from. However, there should always be double level of caution when the source is from the russian terrorist federation or its affiliates.
In this respect, an article was posted from The Telegraph recently that reported on a purported successful ruskie drone campaign, targeting Ukraine’s HIMARS launchers
https://ukrainetoday.org/russias-elite-drone-unit-destroying-ukraines-precious-himars-launchers/
No sort of evidence had been provided to support this assertion. Was it a lie? Chances are better than not that it was. Even if videos or images had been shown, the point goes to the one who questions them and examines them closer. This is by no means an attempt at finger-pointing. Everyone, without exception, has fallen for this or that piece of fake news, lie, deception, or propaganda at one point or another, be it a housewife, a professor, a governmental agency, or a professional journalist. Me too. I’ve learned my lessons and (try) not to fall for them anymore.
To give another example of a claim made by the professional liars, let’s take a look at a different report, this one by Forbes from May 16, entitled, “Russians Field Sawn-Off Shotgun Attachment For Consumer Quadcopters”.
The article opens with; “Drone technology has advanced rapidly during the conflict in Ukraine. Just a couple of months ago we reported on a Ukrainian project mounting a shotgun on a drone with an ingenious method to cancel recoil. Now the Russians are fielding an alternative drone shotgun mount which looks even simpler and more efficient. More significantly, the ease of construction means the new design is likely to spread fast.”
Russian MoD via Twitter
Embedded in the article is a roach video that shows one Ukrainian drone after another being downed in fast succession by these new shotgun drones.
At first, the video left me worried. However, upon further reading, watching, and especially thinking about this new system’s feasibility, I got suspicious. Then, I was sure that this is just another fraudulent fairy tale.
Let’s break down the facts
The article states; “The ammunition is a standard shotgun cartridge, modified by drilling a small hole in it, removing some of the powder and fitting an electric match so the round can be fired by an electrical impulse rather than a mechanical one.”
This sounds like a sound technique, but, here is Fact One: the powder charge is weakened by removing a part of it.
Fact two; the ensuing hole into which the ignition is placed could leak some high pressure gases, which will further reduce the shell’s power.
These aspects could be trivial enough by themselves, seeing that their intended purpose is just to shoot down frail objects. But, here is another problem: the relatively short barrel. A diminutively-sized tube doesn’t allow the powder charge to fully burn, which weakens the shot’s power even more.
The article goes on; “I believe the Russian ‘breakaway’ shotgun attachment is a better solution for mounting on a Mavic than Ukrainian recoilless designs,”
Here, I see the biggest issue of all about this system. I suppose the ruskies – or the Forbes author and the OSINT analyst Roy – are not aware of Newton’s Third Law of Motion: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In the ruskie system, this means that upon firing the shotgun shell, the barrel immediately slips out of the plastic clips, as intended. In doing so, it goes in the opposite direction of the shot charge, as per Newton’s Third Law. However, this will VASTLY reduce the velocity of the pellets.
To make it easier to understand, imagine a cartridge being made to go off by itself (not inside a barrel) and this without rupturing the case. What will happen? The pellet charge (or bullet) being heavier, would remain almost where it was, and the lighter case would fly off backwards, but for only a short distance. Hence, action and reaction. Also take note that almost all the powder would burn after the two parts are forced apart, wasting the rest of the ensuing gasses. In short, neither bullet nor case pose a danger since their velocities are negligible.
This doesn’t happen in a normal shotgun (or other firearm), where you have a much heavier weapon with a proper barrel, and being held by a person weighing x amount of pounds or kilograms. It kicks, yes, but the pellets (or bullet) get an effective and powerful push by the high-pressure gasses since the backward travel in this “system” (or the recoil) is quite minimal compared to the drone shotgun recoil. The drone’s short plastic barrel, held by flimsy clips, simply gets pushed away from the shot charge, leaving little energy left over to push the heavy lead pellets.
One more thing to mention is the shot spread. The spread of those pellets is quite significant due to the very short tube and for a lack of a choke. Anyone who knows shotguns knows such things as Cylinder, Improved Cylinder, Modified, and Full chokes. Drone shotguns are open cylinder, which allows a wide spray pattern. This could in theory increase the hit rate, but what use is this if the pellets are traveling at a puny velocity?
A final point to remember is the arc that projectiles have upon leaving a barrel. Any projectile that exits the muzzle of a weapon is subjected to two forces; air resistance and gravity. They will be slowed down by the air and pulled down by gravity. The combination of both forces makes it more profound. In the ruskie shotgun drone system, you have pellets leaving at a very low velocity and their round form make for poor aerodynamics. Thus, they will drop quite a bit in a relatively short distance.
To put it short, in the ruskie shotgun drone system, only a few pellets arrive at the target and this at a vastly reduced velocity. And, if you don’t aim properly, the pellets will drop below the level of the target, due to the strong arc of their flight path.
Regarding those videos in the article and on Twitter; they are just typical “Potemkin Village”. They mean nothing. Watch both types of videos – the one showing the downing of the Ukrainian drones and the ones showing demonstrations. Notice how the video stays steady during firing in the purported combat videos, but the demonstration videos show how the drone dips forward markedly upon firing. Also notice that there are no details being shown in the demonstration video: You can’t see what it hit or how badly it was hit. It’s all done quite primitively.
We remember the famous attempt to give Ukraine the fault for the downing of MH-17 by their faked image. And, there have been so many other fabrications by them that have come and gone over the years. The russians will do anything for their audiences to make themselves look great, and their enemies look weak. The two examples herein are no exception.
In conclusion, after looking at all the facts, the ruskie answer to shotgun drones seems to be quite pathetic. It MIGHT work SOMETIMES, but I seriously doubt that it is a robust and mostly workable solution and worth all the effort. I also doubt the effective range being 20 meters for such a weakly-powered system. Some soldiers have managed to down a drone by throwing a stick at it. This doesn’t mean that this is a recommended way of fighting them.
When a ruskie claims something, always assume being lied to. Never take them by their words. Only rock-hard evidence counts for anything.
There are plenty of other very dangerous RuZZia activists/professional liars:
Tucker Carlson; known as “the most powerful conservative in America”, is not a conservative by any definition that I understand. He is however immensely powerful and with the exception of Krasnov, has inflicted more damage on Ukraine than anyone else in the west.
Direct quotes:
“Why shouldn’t I root for Russia? Which I am.”
“I think we should probably take the side of Russia if we have to choose between Russia and Ukraine”.
Wiki :
“He asserts that Putin does not hate the United States as much as American liberals do, and suggested there is no reason to dislike Putin, asking his viewers to consider whether Putin has ever called them racist or threatened to get them fired for disagreeing with him. Carlson said it is “not treason, it is not un-American” to support Putin.”
Mother Jones reported that “the Kremlin sent a memo to state media outlets saying it was “essential” to use video clips of Carlson “as much as possible”. Mother Jones further observed Carlson was the only Western media pundit that the Kremlin adopted in this way.”
“Carlson faced fresh criticism for holding the interview with Putin and saying that “leadership requires killing people”.
Carlson :
“Ukraine behind Trump assassination plot.”
“I’m more sympathetic towards Putin than Zelenskyy.”
“Zelenskyy is not a democratically elected leader and is not legitimate.”
“Zelenskyy has also banned religious denominations.”
“Zelenskyy is killing his political opponents.”
“Zelenskyy has banned a language group in Ukraine.”
“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine would not have started if the US had made it clear to Putin that Ukraine would not join NATO.”
“Ukraine had a coup, sponsored by the CIA, in 2014.”
“Russia’s invasion is justified because Zelenskyy is not a legitimate President.”
“Zelenskyy is a dictator with biological weapons.”
“Crimea is Russian and wants to remain part of the Russian Federation.”
“Zelenskyy steals aid and allows his generals to sell half the missiles to Iran and Mexican drug cartels and the black market.”
Source :
https://united24media.com/latest-news/debunking-tucker-carlsons-wild-lies-about-zelenskyy-and-ukraine-5562
Carlson has 1 BN + viewers of his poison and is as guilty of murder as the putinaZi commanders that give the launching orders.
His punishment should mirror that of an earlier nazi propagandist; William Joyce; aka Lord Haw-Haw.
I think even Congolese jungle dwellers will agree that Carlson is not carrying a full load. The people he influences are in the vast majority feebleminded lunkheads, who have difficulty putting together a single sentence without mistakes in their grammar. We will move onward in our history and leave behind such trash, much like the Germans did theirs after WWII.